LIBRARY 

OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA. 

Class 


STRIKES 


WHEN  TO  STRIKE 
HOW  TO  STRIKE 


A  BOOK  OF  SUGGESTION  FOR  THE  BUYERS 
AND  SELLERS  OF  LABOUR 


BY 

OSCAR  T.  CROSBY 

\< 
AUTHOR    OF    "TIBET    AND    TURKESTAN" 

JOINT    AUTHOR    OF 
'THE    ELECTRIC    RAILWAY    IN    THEORY   AND    PRACTICE 


G.  P.  PUTNAM'S  SONS 

NEW    YORK    AND     LONDON 

3be  Ifcnfcfccrbocfcec  press 
1910 


<$» 


COPYRIGHT,  igio 

BY 
OSCAR  T.  CROSBY 


TTbe  fmfcfcerbocfter  press,  flew 


PREFACE 

CONCERNING  Strikes,  this  treatise  in- 
quires as  to  what  is  moral  and  what 
ought  to  be  legal.  It  endeavours  to  classify 
the  causes  that  lead  men  to  strike,  and 
to  measure  the  profit  and  loss  involved 
in  a  struggle  for  higher  wages,  shorter 
hours,  better  general  conditions,  or  for 
recognition  of  a  Union.  It  points  out 
that  this  struggle  is  between  different 
classes  of  workers,  all  of  whom  have  an 
almost  constant  relation  to  capital.  It 
seeks  to  put  all  men  on  guard  in  respect 
to  their  leaders,  those  necessary  yet 
dangerous  elements  of  any  organisation. 
Violence  is  presented  as  a  proper  mono- 
poly of  the  State.  The  boycott,  or 
refusal  of  all  commercial  intercourse 
between  commercial  contestants  and  their 
respective  allies,  is  found  to  be  within  the 
reasonable  right  of  all  men,  as  it  is,  in 
fact,  within  the  actual  practice  of  a  few. 


iv  Preface 

No  formula  is  found  by  which  endless 
contest  may  be  avoided,  except  that 
which  leads  to  some  form  of  tyranny. 
But  the  true  evil  of  contest  is  found  to 
flow  from  violence,  lying,  and  hate. 
To  attempt  even  a  very  small  diminish- 
ment  of  this  evil,  might  worthily  engage 
far  greater  abilities  than  have  been 
employed  in  preparing  this  book. 

In  so  far  as  the  reader  may  discover 
error  in  the  author's  views,  it  may  be 
ascribed  to  lack  of  understanding,  rather 
than  to  want  of  experience  or  of  sympathy. 

A  shred  of  vanity  prompts  the  request 
that  crudity  of  treatment  (which  the 
author  recognises)  should  be,  in  part, 
ascribed  to  the  fact  that  these  pages 
have  been  written  in  the  short  intervals 
of  many  distracting  occupations. 

May  this  work,  in  spite  of  its  defects, 
help  a  few  busy  men,  wage-earners  and 
wage-payers,  to  clearer  vision  and  wider 
charity! 

O.  T.  C. 

WARRENTON,  VIRGINIA,  U.  S.  A. 
March  i,  1910. 


CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  PAGE 

I.     DEFINITION  i 

II.     MORALITY  OF  THE  STRIKE         .  6 

III.  Is  THE  STRIKE  LEGAL?     .         .  12 

IV.  PURPOSE  OF  THE  UNION  .         .  29 
V.    WHY  TO  STRIKE       ...  33 

VI.    SPECIAL  CAUSES  OF  STRIKES — 

ARBITRATION    ...  37 

VII.     DOES  IT  PAY?          ...  47 

Mpmm 

VIII.    CAPITAL  AND  LABOUR      .         .  55 

IX.    WHO  WILL   FURNISH    HIGHER 

WAGES?  ....  62 

X.    CONCLUSIONS  AS  TO  STRIKES  FOR 

HIGHER  PAY     ...  94 

XI.    THE  EIGHT-HOUR  DAY    .         .  96 

V 


vi  Contents 

CHAPTER  PAGE 

XII.    GENERAL   IMPROVEMENT  OF 

WORKING  CONDITIONS       .     104 

XIII.  THE  SYMPATHETIC  STRIKE         .     108 

XIV.  SUMMARY        .         .         .         .116 

XV.    STRIKES  FOR  THE  UNION — Do 

THEY  PAY?       .         .         .119 

XVI.    How  TO  STRIKE — VIOLENCE  AND 

LYING      .         .         .         .141 

XVII.    THE  BOYCOTT  AND  THE  PICKET  .     152 

XVIII.     OBLIGATION  OF  LEADERS          .     174 

XIX.     HOME-BUILDING      .         .         .     1 86 

XX.    CONCLUSION   .         .         .         .193 

INDEX 199 


STRIKES 


OF   THE 

f 
OF 

... 


The  Question  of  Strikes 

CHAPTER  I 

DEFINITION 

iNjthe  word  "Strike"  there  is  some- 
thing manly,  inspiriting — violent. 

It  suggests  the  blacksmith's  hammer, 
the  woodsman's  axe,  the  patriot's  sword 
— a  trinity  of  tools  with  which  man  has 
made  for  himself,  poor  savage  that.. he 
was,  a  home  and  a  country.  He  has 
struck  against  Nature  who  would  starve 
and  freeze  him;  he  has  struck  against  his 
fellows  who  would  enslave  him. 

From  the  deep  hollows  of  the  past  we 
hear  an  echo  of  many  blows;  they  blend 
into  a  song  of  achievement — of  man 
achieving  civilisation. 


2  Strikes 

But  the  blacksmith  has  forged  mana- 
cles for  the  free;  the  edge  of  the  axe  has 
been  laid  against  the  sheltering  roof -tree ; 
the  sword  has  been  in  the  assassin's  hand. 
Men  have  struck  for  bad  things  as  well  as 
for  good  things.  It  is  always  so.  Every 
force,  every  instrument  that  may  be  used 
to  help,  may  also  be  used  to  hurt. 

We  cannot  win  the  life-long  struggle  by 
any  easily-made  rules;  we  cannot  follow 
the  uncertain  path  before  us  by  the  flash- 
lights of  occasional  inspiration.  But  with 
patience  and  courage  man  has  found 
paths  that  are  fairly  pleasant  leading 
from  the  cradle  to  the  grave. 

Let  us  then  cheerfully,  and  hoping  for 
a  little  gain,  attack  the  problem  before 
us, — How  to  strike — Why  to  strike. 

And  at  the  beginning,  let  us  define  the 
word  "  Strike  "  as  it  is  to  be  used  in  these 
pages.  It  shall  be  taken  to  mean,  "  A  pre- 
arranged cessation  of  work  by  several 
employes,  intending  thus  to  cause  an 
unwilling  employer,  through  fear  of  loss, 
to  accept  demands  made  by  the  strikers 
on  behalf  of  themselves  or  others.'* 


Definition  3 

This  formal  definition  is  compact  and 
hard,  like  the  soldier's  emergency  ration; 
but  it  is  not  without  value.  We  may  at 
once  discover  in  it  several  branches  of  our 
inquiry.  We  find:  the  cessation  of  work, 
pure  and  simple;  the  prearrangement 
leading  up  to  such  cessation,  that  is,  the 
union  of  several  employe's;  the  object  of 
the  union;  the  division  into  sympathetic 
and  direct  strikes ;  the  opposition  between 
the  interests  of  employer  and  employe*. 

These  are  the  definite  elements  giving 
us  the  hard  skeleton  of  the  strike.  Do 
you  not  also  feel  its  warm  body,  made  of 
human  hope,  despair,  rejoicing,  hunger, 
heart-ache,  love,  hate,  selfishness,  and 
sacrifice?  These  are  the  very  substance 
of  life.  They  are  immanent  in  every  dry 
legal  discussion,  or  else  that  discussion 
has  no  value.  But  the  flesh  and  blood 
part  cannot  always  be  kept  before  us  in 
complete  form.  We  must  sometimes  strip 
to  the  bone,  in  order  to  understand  the 
structure  of  the  organism.  So  it  is  that 
if  in  these  pages  there  should  seem  to  be 
lack  of  sentiment,  let  it  be  remembered 


4  Strikes 

that  this  is  a  study  of  the  anatomy  of  the 
strike. 

Ligaments,  muscles,  veins,  bones — 
these  are  not  pleasing  to  the  eye,  yet  is  it 
useful  to  know  something  of  their  com- 
position. 

The  definition1  does  not  involve  violence, 
or  deceit.  These  may,  and  often  do,  enter 
into  the  programme  of  one  or  both  of  the 
parties  to  a  strike.  But  they  are  not 
necessary  incidents  to  the  mere  cessation 
of  work — which  is  the  strike  proper. 

In  the  following  pages  we  shall  consider 

1  Minor  objections  to  the  definition  might  be  made 
as  follows : 

First — Why  is  not  the  "strike"  of  a  single  employe* 
included  ?  Has  he  not  the  same  motives  as  the  ' '  several 
employe's,"  and  may  not  his  cessation  of  work  be 
sometimes  of  capital  importance  in  enforcing  his 
demands  ? 

Yes,  but  in  this  treatise,  the  co-operative  strike  alone 
is  considered.  It  breeds  a  host  of  difficult  legal  ques- 
tions not  raised  by  the  single  striker. 

Second — Is  the  employer  always  "unwilling"? 
Must  he  always  be  injured? 

Usually  the  strikers'  demands  have  been  made  and 
refused  before  the  strike  is  "on."  In  the  rare  cases  in 
which  the  strike  precedes  the  demand,  unwillingness  is 
supposed  and  injury  is  attempted,  even  though  the 
employer  be  found  at  once  ready  to  yield. 


Definition  5 

the  various  accessory  actions  that  may 
be  connected  with  a  strike,  and  we 
shall  try  to  separate  the  sheep  from  the 


goats. 


CHAPTER  II 

MORALITY  OF  THE  STRIKE 

THERE  are  many  persons  to  whom  the 
question  of  the  morality  of  strikes  pre- 
sents no  difficulty  whatever.  These  may 
well  pass  over  this  short  chapter,  unless 
they  prefer  to  judge  the  author's  moral 
standards  by  what  he  may  say  concern- 
ing this  particular  question. 

Having  clearly  stated  just  what  a  strike 
is,  we  may  ask  ourselves,  in  the  first 
place,  not  "Why  to  strike?"  or  "How 
to  strike?"  — but,  "Shall  we  strike  at 
all?" 

This  question  can  be  disposed  of  by 
answering  three  sub-questions  about  the 
strike — first,  "Is  it  moral?"  second,  "Is 
it  legal? "  third,  "  Is  it  profitable  to  those 
who  strike?" 

A  fairly  good  man  is  unwilling  to  do  an 

6 


Morality  of  the  Strike  7 

immoral  act,  though  it  may  be  both  legal 
and  profitable. 

A  fairly  good  citizen  is  unwilling  to  do 
an  illegal  act,  though  it  may  be  both 
moral  and  profitable. 

A  fairly  good  business  man  is  unwilling 
to  do  an  unprofitable  act,  though  it  may 
be  both  moral  and  legal. 

A  fairly  wise  man  is  unwilling  to  do  an 
act  which  is  not  at  the  same  time  moral, 
legal,  profitable. 

As  to  the  first  question,  "Is  it 
moral?"— 

That  is  " moral"  which  is  believed  to 
benefit,  more  than  it  injures,  the  majority 
of  men  who  are  our  neighbours — using 
the  latter  word  in  a  very  broad  sense. 

We  have  proved  the  "  morality  "  of  only 
a  few  general  principles  of  conduct. 

"Thou  shalt  not  steal."  This  is  rea- 
sonably easy  to  apply  after  we  have 
established  elaborate  rules  for  determin- 
ing what  is  yours  and  what  is  mine.  It 
restricts  the  happiness  of  a  small  minority. 
It  even  denies  to  them  at  times  ordinary 
comfort,  and  it  may  require  acute  suffer- 


8  Strikes 

ing  or  death.  But  observance  of  this  rule 
has  been  found  by  centuries  of  experience 
in  human  society  to  increase  the  general 
average  of  comfort  and  happiness.  Hence 
we  insist  upon  it  as  one  of  the  moralities, 
and  we  pardon  an  infraction  of  the  rule 
only  in  extreme  cases. 

"Thou  shalt  not  kill.'*  This  also  is 
relatively  simple  after  elaborately  pro- 
viding for  exceptional  cases,  such  as 
killing  in  self-defence,  in  war,  on  the 
official  scaffold,  etc.  The  danger  in- 
volved in  killing  often  makes  of  this 
"morality"  its  own  policeman. 

"Thou  shalt  not  bear  false  witness 
against  thy  neighbour."  This  is  fairly 
clear  if  we  can  agree  upon  a  definition  of 
"neighbour." 

Thus,  it  is  generally  thought  good 
morals  to  lie  to  a  public  enemy,  or  about 
him,  provided  the  state  to  which  you 
belong  (you,  the  liar)  is  to  be  benefited 
thereby.  It  is  also  good  morals  in  cer- 
tain cases  to  lie  in  defence  of  a  woman's 
reputation. 

This  "morality"  is,  as  yet,  but  weakly 


Morality  of  the  Strike  9 

established  in  the  minds  of  many  men, 
even  when  we  consider  the  mild  prohibi- 
tion quoted  from  the  old  Jewish  code.  If 
we  make  it  more  stringent,  thus,  "Thou 
shalt  not  bear  false  witness,  whether  or 
not  thy  neighbour  be  injured  thereby," 
we  shall  find  the  number  of  adherents 
wofully  small. 

The  simplicity  and  finality  of  even 
these  fundamental  rules  is  thus  found  to 
be  only  in  their  statement — not  in  their 
application.  When  we  begin  to  live,  the 
code  presents  many  doubts. 

But  it  may  be  thought  that  before 
determining  the  morality  of  an  act  we 
should  turn  from  the  "Don'ts"  of  the 
Decalogue  to  such  positive  rules  of  self- 
abnegation  as  were  preached  by  Christ. 

Does  a  strike  conform  to  the  principle 
which  requires  the  right  cheek  to  be 
turned  to  him  who  has  struck  the  left? 
No! 

Does  it  conform  to  the  less  drastic 
requirement  of  the  Golden  Rule?  No! 

It  is  plainly  a  contest  of  interest  waged 
by  inflicting  injury  upon  the  employer, 


io  Strikes 

with  the  hope  that  this  strike-injury  may 
seem  to  him  greater  than  that  which 
would  be  suffered  by  yielding  to  the 
strikers'  demands. 

In  the  effort  to  do  harm  there  may  be 
no  hate,  no  bitterness;  but  also  there  is 
in  it  none  of  the  spirit  which  would  give 
the  coat  to  him  who  has  asked  the  cloak. 
If  that  standard  of  morality  be  applied, 
then  is  the  strike  immoral — and  all  the 
rest  of  the  ordinary  conduct  of  life  goes 
with  it. 

In  our  hearts  we  reject  the  perfect 
self-sacrifice  of  Christ — we  do  not  believe 
that  we  can  live  by  it  here.  Possibly 
such  conduct  might  give  us  treasures  in 
heaven — but  not  an  increase  of  wages  on 
earth.  And  meanwhile,  we  argue,  the 
wife  and  children  must  be  fed  and  clothed. 
They  will  be  in  want  if  we  do  not  make 
good  bargains  for  our  service,  or  our 
wares.  We  must  now  and  then  refuse 
the  offer  of  the  purchaser  and  maintain 
prices  by  withholding  our  goods  or  our 
labour. 

This  is  plainly  an  expensive  way  of 


Morality  of  the  Strike          n 

reaching  the  desired  results .  It  is  ' '  chari- 
table" only  to  those  who  are  near  us  in 
interest,  whose  battles  we  must  fight. 

Is  there  indeed  any  Christian  charity 
in  any  war,  in  any  competition?  No. 

Yet  when  the  people  of  a  Christian 
nation  want  something  very  badly  they 
fight  for  it — and  square  with  Christ  by 
calling  it  a  "holy  war." 

And  as  to  commercial  competition, 
upon  which  society  now  depends  for  its 
daily  bread,  its  practical  motto  is  "  Each 
for  himself."  The  ideal  of  "Service  for 
all"  is  indeed  gaining  ground,  yet  now 
the  community  receives  only  the  surplus 
remaining  after  the  satisfaction  of  large 
individual  appetites.  Such  is  the  general 
idea  and  practice  of  morality  this  side 
of  the  grave;  and  as  judged  by  it,  the 
strike  needs  no  apology. 


CHAPTER  III 

IS  THE  STRIKE  LEGAL? 

THE  legal  status  of  all  labour  questions 
varies  widely  from  State  to  State.  In- 
deed, in  any  one  State,  judicial  decisions 
fluctuate  over  a  wide  range.  In  en- 
deavouring to  apply  old  principles  to 
new  conditions,  society  is  feeling  its  way 
through  a  tangle  of  conflicting  claims. 

The  general  object  of  this  treatise  is 
gained  not  by  discussing  the  present 
legality  of  any  of  the  acts  considered,  but 
rather  their  wisdom;  their  fitness  for 
being  made  legal,  if  they  are  not  already 
so;  or  their  fitness  for  being  prohibited 
if  they  are  now  permitted. 

If  the  reader  be  helped  to  form  an 
opinion  as  to  what  ought  to  be  legal,  this 
"ought  to  be"  may  be  turned  into  "is," 
when  that  opinion  shall  have  been 

12 


Is  the  Strike  Legal  ?  13 

adopted  by  a  majority  of  his  fellow- 
citizens.  Their  formally  expressed  will 
is  law. 

To  ask,  "Is  it  legal?"  is  not  the  same 
as  if  we  should  ask,  " Is  it  moral?"  We 
call  those  things  immoral  whose  bad 
effects  are  so  generally  recognised  that 
they  would  be  condemned  by  public  con- 
science whether  prohibited  by  statute  or 
not. 

There  are  immoralities,  most  impor- 
tant immoralities,  which  cannot  be  made 
the  subject  of  written  law.  How  shall 
I  be  compelled  to  be  kind — to  be  respect- 
ful— to  be  charitable  ? 

On  the  other  hand,  many  legal  require- 
ments are  without  moral  character  in 
themselves.  They  are  mere  regulations. 
The  determination  of  the  form  and  colour 
of  ballots  does  not  raise  a  moral  question, 
but  it  is  an  important  subject  of  legal 
enactment. 

We  know,  too,  that  in  the  slow  process 
of  " guessing"  at  what  is  good,  our  law- 
makers must  often  err — must  often  pro- 
hibit things  which  should  not,  for  the 


14  Strikes 

common  good,  be  prohibited.  Hence, 
an  act  may  be  illegal  which,  in  itself, 
is  righteous  enough. 

And  again  an  act  may  be  prohibited 
by  a  small  majority  of  law-makers  while 
a  large  minority  declare  for  just  the 
opposite  course.  In  such  case  it  is 
clear  that  the  public  conscience  is  not 
yet  formed  in  respect  to  the  matters  in 
question.1 

Hence  as  against  mere  legal  enactment 
men  are  often  tempted  to  follow  their 
individual  opinions,  and  more  particu- 
larly their  individual  interests. 

If  in  adult  life  one  cannot  classify  a 
desired  action  as  falling  somehow  within 
the  morality-prohibitions  which  were 

1  Morality  also  may  be  said  to  vary  in  time  and  place. 
It  undoubtedly  does  vary  in  the  sense  that  a  list  of 
moral  prohibitions,  if  made  up  for  France  in  1900  A.D., 
would  not  be  the  same  as  for  France  in  noo  A.D.  ;  or 
for  Rome  in  400  B.C.  Legal  codes,  however,  fluctuate 
so  much  more  violently  than  the  moral  code  that  the 
latter  seems  relatively  fixed.  Men  may  experiment 
legislatively  for  ages  before  elaborating  a  single  new 
principle  that  will  take  its  place  among  the  moral 
principles  whose  sovereignty  is  recognised  by  the 
national  sense  of  righteousness.  Meanwhile,  the  law 
gives  and  withdraws  her  favours  most  freakishly. 


Is  the  Strike  Legal  ?  15 

learned  in  childhood,  one  is  tempted  to 
gratify  the  desire,  and  spurn  the  restraint. 
The  man's  conduct  is  governed  by  the 
child's  conscience. 

Yet  withal,  there  is  some  uneasiness 
felt  in  the  mind  of  the  enlightened  citizen 
when  he  runs  counter  to  any  of  the  laws 
of  his  country. 

There  is  a  taint  of  immorality  in  all 
illegality.  The  law  may  be  esteemed 
foolish,  but  obedience  to  law  is  at  the  root 
of  the  tree  of  social  life.  If  I  base  obe- 
dience only  upon  my  approval,  I  am 
standing  for  anarchy,  against  government. 
Protection  for  life,  liberty,  and  the  pur- 
suit of  happiness  can  be  given  to  me 
only  within  the  conditions  set  down  by 
the  law  and  only  at  the  price  of  general 
obedience  to  the  law. 

Not  many  of  us  would  refuse  to  escape 
from  the  death  penalty,  as  Socrates  did, 
for  fear  of  cheating  the  state;  but  most 
of  us  feel  mean  after  lying  to  the  customs 
officer? 

Have  we  not  given  false  witness  against 
the  interest  of  our  neighbour,  who  ardently 


1 6  Strikes 

desires  us  to  pay  taxes  for  the  general 
good?  Have  we  not  broken  the  law? 

If,  in  their  folly,  legislators  should  ever 
declare  strikes  illegal,  we  shall  find  it 
easier  on  the  conscience  to  use  our  votes 
for  changing  the  law,  rather  than  to 
break  it. 

Not  only  can  the  right  of  striking  be 
preserved  by  agitating  and  voting,  but 
we  can  see  to  it  that  no  other  than  a 
money  damage  shall  be  assessed  against 
an  employ6  who,  in  order  to  strike, 
may  have  broken  a  contract  for  service 
during  a  fixed  period.  Such  a  contract 
must  be  classed  with  other  commercial 
engagements.1  If  made  and  broken 
without  fraudulent  intent,  no  commercial 
engagement  carries  with  it,  in  its  break- 
ing, any  punishment  running  against 

» In  this  view  of  the  matter,  unions  which  order 
strikes  in  violation  of  contract  obligations  should  be 
required  to  have  such  legal  organisation  as  will  permit 
penalties  to  reach  their  treasury  funds.  This  is  already 
the  case  in  some  countries  (Canada,  for  example)  and 
no  other  condition  is  consistent  with  fair  dealing.  We 
should  not  try  "to  have  our  cake  and  eat  it  too."  The 
effort  to  indulge  our  appetites  in  that  way  always  fails 
in  the  long  run. 


Is  the  Strike  Legal  ?  17 

the  body  of  the  delinquent,  but  only 
against  his  property. 

An  exception  to  the  rule  that  an 
employe's  contract  should  be  considered 
as  purely  commercial,  is  to  be  found  in 
any  contract  for  service  involving  quite 
directly  the  lives  or  the  comfort  of  many 
persons  who  have  rightfully  placed  them- 
selves within  the  power  of  the  employe*. 
Such  engagements  cannot  be  broken  in  a 
manner  that  would  seriously  imperil  or 
discommode  third  parties  without  intro- 
ducing an  element  of  criminality. 

Thus,  a  locomotive  engineer  should 
not  be  permitted  by  society  to  quit  his 
engine  save  at  the  end  of  his  run.  His 
contract  must  be  understood  as  being 
in  part  with  the  public, — not  solely  with 
the  railway  company.  The  loss,  dis- 
comfort, and  danger  suffered  by  a  train- 
load  of  people  when  left  between  stations 
cannot  be  compensated  by  any  money 
award  which  the  engineer  could  pay. 
Hence  we  must  punish  a  man  who  would 
do  such  an  evil  thing,  as  one  punishes  a 
naughty  child. 


1 8  Strikes 

Imprisonment  is  properly  decreed 
against  him  who,  in  immoderate  self- 
seeking,  gravely  imperils  the  happiness 
of  others  by  cessation  of  his  accustomed 
work  at  an  untimely  hour. 

Save  for  this  condition,  complete  con- 
trol of  any  man's  labour  must  be  left  to 
himself. 

Much  folly,  much  wrong  toward  him- 
self and  toward  others  will  result  from 
the  exercise  by  the  average  man  of  this 
simple  right.  He  will  often  inflict  serious 
monetary  losses  for  which  a  damage  suit 
offers  only  theoretical  compensation. 

He  who  has  liberty  without  property 
resembles  a  man  with  fleshless  body — he 
may  strike  without  fear  of  his  foeman's 
steel.  He  may  cause  inconvenience, 
pain,  illness — perhaps  death — a  whole 
series  of  wrongs  which  cannot  be  ex- 
pressed in  terms  of  money.  They  must 
be  borne  for  liberty's  sake. 

Lacking  wisdom,  this  average  man  of 
the  populace  must  often  wound  his  own 
interest  with  the  sharp  knife  of  unfettered 
liberty.  His  wife  and  children  will  be 


Is  the  Strike  Legal  ?  19 

stricken  down  by  the  blows  of  his  own 
folly.  And  in  his  course  of  errors  he 
will  not  be  alone.  On  his  right  hand 
will  be  the  rich  man;  on  his  left  hand  the 
educated  man.  Only  a  little  wisdom  is 
given  to  any  of  us. 

The  old  ways  of  childlike  docility 
are  definitely  forsaken.  We  know  that 
Superior  Intelligence,  if  enthroned  over 
an  inarticulate  multitude,  soon  degen- 
erates into  Tyranny,  which  ceases  to  be 
wise  and  remains  selfish. 

So  it  is  that  we  prefer  to  stumble 
painfully  along  free  paths  rather  than 
to  be  led  by  the  hand  of  a  Fixed  Superior. 
The  safety  to  which  he  brings  us  is  servi- 
tude. Our  study,  therefore,  should  ever 
be  to  leave  as  much  freedom  of  action 
as  is  consistent  with  the  maintenance  of 
order,  which  is  the  solid  foundation  of 
society. 

As  to  just  what  restrictions  are  necessary 
for  the  preservation  of  this  social  order, 
we  must  guess  our  way  in  detail.  The 
light  of  absolute  knowledge  never  shines 
very  far  ahead  or  very  deep  into  the 


20  Strikes 

darkness  on  the  right  hand  and  the  left 
hand. 

We  do  not  now  doubt  our  course  in 
respect  to  the  question,  "  Shall  a  man  be 
legally  free  (save  in  the  special  cases  of 
peril  above  noted1)  to  cease  work  when 
he  chooses?"  To  this  we  answer,  "Yes, 
he  is  and  shall  be  free." 

But  let  us  change  a  little  the  question 
just  answered.  "  Shall  a  man  be  legally 
free  to  solicit  others  to  quit  their  em- 
ployment with  a  view  to  some  benefit 
which  is  to  be  gained  only  by  injuring 
the  employer?" 

This  is  a  right  that  has  been  questioned, 
yet  without  it  the  strike,  as  an  organised 
effort  of  many,  would  perish. 

He  who  solicits  me  to  leave  my  work 
may  cease  his  own  employ  without  in  any 
way  passing  the  long-established  bounda- 
ries of  freedom.  The  injury  which  he 
may  do  to  another,  the  wrong  he  may 
do  to  his  own  interests  by  his  isolated 
action,  have  been  accepted  by  society  as 

»  It  will  be  seen  that  important  service  of  the  state, 
military  and  other,  falls  within  this  exception. 


Is  the  Strike  Legal  ?  21 

the  price  demanded  by  shrewd  Nature 
for  the  jewel,  liberty. 

But  is  this  further  license  of  soliciting 
others  to  be  likewise  excused  ? 

We  have  learned  that  no  great  and 
general  harm — no  great  and  general  good 
— can  be  accomplished  by  any  one  of  us 
acting  alone;  we  have  learned  that  co- 
operation gives  us  the  big  results;  we 
have  learned  to  apply  an  ugly  word, 
Conspiracy,  to  such  co-operation  as  seeks 
an  end  by  us  condemned.  And  for 
co-operation  seeking  what  we  call  good 
ends,  we  reserve  the  inspiring  word, 
Union. 

Union  means  strength,  and  it  means 
leadership — strength  of  many  voluntarily 
placed  at  the  disposal  of  one;  hence, 
danger — danger  of  that  very  servitude 
from  which  we  have  determined  to  escape 
at  any  price. 

Against  this  we  guard  by  reserving 
free  choice  of  leaders.  They  must  be 
subject  to  dismissal.  That  is  the  secret 
of  successful  democracy.  It  must  have 
leadership;  it  must  have  that  which 


22  Strikes 

imperils  its  very  life.  ELECTIVE  leader- 
ship solves  the  problem. 

It  may  be  asked — "What  has  this  to 
do  with  the  question  as  to  the  right  of 
Smith  to  solicit  Jones  for  his  co-operation 
in  a  strike?"  And  the  answer  is  this: 
The  co-operation  which  he  establishes 
through  his  solicitation  is,  in  fact,  a  union. 
It  may  be  temporary;  it  is  generally 
permanent. 

The  desire  to  strike  may  have  given 
birth  to  the  union,  but  once  formed,  the 
union  becomes  the  father  and  the  mother 
of  future  strikes.  The  question  "How 
and  why  to  strike?"  becomes  "How  and 
why  to  form  and  conduct  a  labour  union  ? " 

Hence  it  is  that  no  inquiry  such  as  our 
title  suggests  can  be  made  without  making 
a  study  of  the  unions. 

Substantially,  the  organisation  of  em- 
ploy^s  into  a  great  union  becomes  a  state 
within  a  state.  The  comfort  of  society 
is  largely  affected  by  this  smaller  state. 
Its  action  may  be  opposed  to  the  will  of 
the  larger  body,  the  true  sovereign  of  all. 
There  is  here  a  possible  danger — Shall  it 


Is  the  Strike  Legal  ?  23 

be  avoided  by  crushing  the  egg  from 
which  may  be  hatched  a  bird  powerful 
for  good  and  evil?  No!! 

The  same  principle  which  permits  us  to 
form  democratic  governments,  will  per- 
mit those  governments  to  view  without 
alarm  the  establishment  of  various 
"unions"  among  their  citizens. 

Reduced  to  its  skeleton,  the  argument 
may  be  thus  constructed.  Free  govern- 
ments are  based  upon  the  principle  that 
majorities  shall  rule  themselves,  and  the 
minorities.  This  rule  is,  for  convenience, 
placed  temporarily  in  the  hands  of  a  few 
men — legislators,  judges,  and  executive 
officers,  who  govern  in  the  name  of  the 
majority  until  dismissed.  This  principle 
is  now  the  basic  one  controlling  the  public 
life  of  England,1  the  United  States, 
France,  Italy,1  Holland,1  Belgium,1 
Sweden,1  Norway,1  Switzerland,  and  with 
some  restriction  (constantly  lessening) 
Germany  and  Austria. 

»  These  are  included,  although  in  form  the  executive 
is  not  subject  to  dismissal.  For  the  most  important 
matters  the  Prime  Ministers  of  these  countries  are  the 
real  chief  executives;  and  they  are  subject  to  dismissal. 


24  Strikes 

It  is  believed  to  be  a  guide  between 
tyranny  on  the  one  hand  and  wild 
license  on  the  other.  Its  application  to 
minor  organisations  will  render  them 
relatively  harmless,  provided  their  object 
in  itself  is  not  sinister. 

The  members  of  any  one  such  body  may 
have  interests  special  to  themselves  and 
more  or  less  antagonistic  to  the  interests 
of  certain  other  citizens;  but  in  the  main 
these  members  will  be  actuated  by  the 
common  interests,  the  common  human- 
ity, and  the  common  sense  which  at  the 
same  time  are  influencing  the  general 
public  to  which  they  belong.  If  their 
association  is  of  such  character  that  the 
many  who  compose  it  may  promptly 
control  the  few  to  whom  power  has  been 
delegated,  we  may  safely  assume  that 
the  lesser  allegiance  thus  created  may  be 
indulged  without  ultimate  injury  to  the 
larger  vital  allegiance  owed  to  the  state 
itself. 

And,  on  the  contrary,  however  harm- 
less may  be  the  avowed  object  of  an  or- 
ganisation not  founded  on  this  general 


Is  the  Strike  Legal  ?  25 

democratic  principle,  it  is  to  be  viewed 
with  suspicion.  Thus  the  Catholic 
Church,  potentially  one  of  the  most 
benignant  institutions  ever  known 
among  men,  has  often  been  betrayed 
into  most  harmful  activities  because 
its  form  of  organisation  bestows  upon 
a  few  individuals  vast,  secret,  and  life- 
long powers.  Happily  for  it  and  for 
the  world,  the  democratic  principle  did 
not  completely  abdicate  and  leave  the 
delegated  power  hereditary  in  those 
families  first  receiving  it.  Excesses  due 
to  its  peculiar  form  have  often  been 
checked  by  some  outburst  of  the 
democratic  principle  acting  within  the 
organisation,  or  through  pressure  ex- 
erted by  democratic  force  from  without. 
Under  these  influences  the  Church  is 
everywhere  becoming  less  tyrannical — 
more  beneficent. 

When  the  great  union,  the  state  it- 
self, has  done  all  that  its  wisdom  (or  its 
folly)  permits  to  be  accomplished  by 
its  direct  action,  much  that  may  be 
beneficial  remains  undone.  For  the 


26  Strikes 

accomplishment  of  this  large  remainder, 
are  churches,  guilds,  lodges,  societies  of 
all  sorts. 

And,  now,  already  highly  developed 
and  ever  growing  stronger,  are  the  labour 
unions.  In  them  we  see  everywhere  the 
rule  of  the  majority  fully  established. 

The  government  of  these  various  unions 
exhibits  all  the  strength  and  all  the  weak- 
ness of  sovereign  states  which  are  con- 
trolled by  their  people. 

In  the  fierce  battle  of  commercial  com- 
petition the  humble  of  the  earth  are 
marching  in  regiments  and  brigades. 
The  impotent  appeal  of  one  struggling 
man  or  woman  for  higher  pay,  more  light, 
shorter  hours,  or  kinder  supervision,  has 
grown  into  the  dignified  demand  of 
compact  thousands. 

They  speak  through  ambassadors ;  they 
are  inspired  by  chieftains;  they  are 
served  by  executives. 

And  sometimes  these  ambassadors  mis- 
interpret; these  chieftains  lead  to  folly; 
these  executives  betray,  even  as  it  has 


Is  the  Strike  Legal  ?  27 

ever  been  in  the  slow  progress  of  govern- 
ments among  men.  But  also  fidelity, 
intelligence,  courage,  self-sacrifice,  and, 
in  the  main,  fair  service  are  found  in 
those  who  are  trusted  by  their  fellows. 

The  walking  delegate  is  often  an  igno- 
rant mischief-maker.  So  also  is  the  con- 
stable or  the  parson.  More  often  they 
are,  all  three  of  them,  sincerely  devoted 
to  the  duty  of  their  office. 

The  great  labour-leader  is  sometimes 
corrupt,  or  vulgarly  ambitious.  So  also 
is  the  great  statesman.  More  often  both 
are  weighed  down  with  an  honourable 
sense  of  their  responsibility. 

Even  if  the  record  of  their  fine  conduct 
were  lacking,  one  might  assume  that  the 
elected  chiefs  of  the  unions  could  scarce 
fail  to  possess  in  marked  degree  at  least 
one  qualification  for  their  duties — namely 
a  full  sympathy  with  those  who  select 
them.  In  education  and  experience  they 
are  close  to  those  whom  they  represent. 
Far  easier  for  them  than  for  individu- 
als drawn  from  the  "ruling  classes,"  to 
know  the  joys  and  sorrows,  the  hopes 


28  Strikes 

and  fears  of  the  masses  whose  power 
they  wield  for  a  time. 

Judged,  then,  by  its  form  of  govern- 
ment the  labour  union  is  found  to  be  in 
the  spirit  of  the  age,  and  hence  need  fear 
no  charge  of  illegitimacy  on  that  score. 


CHAPTER  IV 

PURPOSE  OF  THE  UNION 

LEAVING  the  form,  let  us  examine  the 
purposes. 

We  shall  not  tarry  long  in  arriving  at 
a  conclusion  that  in  this  respect,  also, 
society  must  put  no  ban  of  illegality  upon 
associations  which  work  for  the  better- 
ment of  so  large  a  fraction  of  the  whole 
body.  And  the  fraction  in  question  is 
precisely  that  whose  uplift  in  material 
things  seems  most  important. 

Without  the  constant  struggle  of  the 
humble  masses,  a  complete  stratification 
of  society  would  soon  be  established. 
There  is  a  fixed  tendency  in  that  direc- 
tion. The  powerful  force  of  inheritance, 
natural  and  artificial,  works  toward  this 
stratification. 

Strong  individuals  obtain  control  of 
large  amounts  of  physical  property — of 
29 


30  Strikes 

the  things  which  feed  and  clothe  the 
body.  These,  together  with  something  of 
the  superior  intellectual  equipment,  go  to 
their  descendants,  and  soon  we  see,  in  all 
its  terrible  meaning,  that  "to  him  that 
hath  it  shall  be  given,  and  from  him  that 
hath  not,  it  shall  be  taken  away,  even 
that  which  he  hath." 

And  we  hear  men  say  of  other  men, 
"They  are  not  born."  A  French  Revo- 
lution was  necessary  to  remind  those 
who  were  "born,"  that  parturition  is 
common  to  the  race. 

The  struggle  against  this  tendency  is 
the  very  work  of  democracy.  Indeed 
this  uplifting  of  the  relatively  weak  is 
democracy  creating  itself.  It  should  be 
ever  extending;  but  not  up  to  the  point 
of  seriously  curtailing  the  efforts  of  those 
naturally  superior  individuals  who  must 
lead  in  industrial  progress  as  a  general 
leads  in  military  work. 

These  generals  find  themselves;  they 
take  command  and  produce  results. 
They  are  to  be  rewarded  by  society  in 
material  things,  and  in  public  esteem. 


Purpose  of  the  Union  31 

Just  as  the  leaders  who  traded  regu- 
larly in  war  were  wont  to  demand  a  con- 
siderable part  of  the  booty  yielded  by  a 
bloody  victory,  so  now  the  generals  of 
industry  demand  a  considerable  part 
of  the  bounty  which  is  captured  in  the 
struggle  of  man  with  nature. 

It  is  the  work  of  highly  civilised  peo- 
ples that  their  chiefs  put  a  relatively 
greater  value  upon  reputation,  and  less 
upon  material  wage,  than  is  done  among 
warlike  societies,  whose  armies  are  pre- 
datory bands. 

The  pay  of  the  common  soldier  is  much 
nearer  that  of  the  general  in  the  year  1900 
than  it  was  in  1600  when  dukedoms  and 
principalities  went  to  the  leader,  while  a 
pittance  went  to  the  ranks. 

The  industrial  army  is  developing  in  the 
same  direction.  The  adjustment  is  seen 
in  the  fact  that  great  corporations  yield 
phenomenal  fortunes  only  to  their  found- 
ers ;  those  who  subsequently  direct  them 
are  partly  paid  in  the  coin  of  public  esteem. 

The  ordinary  worker  receives  none  of 
this.  He  escapes  the  wakeful  care  and 


32  Strikes 

cannot  claim  the  glory.  He  must  aim 
to  have  a  comfort-making  share  of  the 
total  product.  Out  of  this  a  quiet  con- 
tent may  be  enjoyed,  and  young  ambition 
may  find  its  stimulus  and  support. 

No  peaceful  means  looking  toward 
the  attainment  of  satisfying  food,  warm 
clothing,  comfortable  housing,  and  mod- 
erate amusement  should  be  denied  to  a 
man  willing  to  work.  It  is  the  purpose 
of  the  union,  often  acting  through  the 
strike,  to  help  the  worker  toward  this 
end.  It  is  a  good  purpose. 

Finding  then  that  the  union  (and  its 
child,  the  strike)  is  democratic  in  form 
and  democratic  in  its  purpose,  democ- 
racy has  decreed  its  legality.  Only  in 
such  statutes  as  may  indirectly  and  unin- 
tentionally question  the  right  of  strik- 
ing by  co-operation,  should  that  right 
even  be  mentioned;  and  then,  only  to 
assert  it  as  inviolable,  thus  saving  the 
delicate  conscience  of  a  judge  who  might 
find  himself  embarrassed  in  dealing  with 
some  uncertain  phrase,  such  as  "  combina- 
tions in  restraint  of  trade." 


CHAPTER  V 

WHY  TO  STRIKE 

WE  have  shown  that  the  strike  is  not 
immoral.  We  have  shown  that  it  must 
not  be  illegal.  According  to  the  strict 
order  of  our  inquiry  as  set  forth  in  a  pre- 
vious chapter,  we  should  now  ask,  "  Does 
it  pay?" 

But  the  answer  to  that  question  will 
depend  somewhat  upon  the  object  of  the 
strike.  Hence,  we  shall  first  discuss  the 
question  "  Why  to  strike"  and  shall  also 
consider  whether  arbitration  may  not  be 
always  substituted  for  the  strike,  thus, 
perhaps,  rendering  useless  any  further 
inquiry  under  our  title. 

A  few  weeks  ago  the  following  report 
appeared  in  a  number  of  American 
newspapers : 

The  hello-girls  in  the  Central  Telephone  station 

at struck  yesterday  because  the  manager 

3  33 


34  Strikes 

refused  to  raise  the  shades  covering  windows 
that  look  out  upon  the  street.  The  girls  declared 
that  an  occasional  glance  into  the  life  of  the 
street  did  not  interfere  with  their  work.  The 
manager  thought  differently. 

The  reader  will  find  it  very  easy  to 
re-write  for  himself  the  various  press 
comments  suggested  by  this  paragraph. 
The  quick  journalistic  mind  could  make 
from  such  a  substance  a  hundred  jests. 
Others  would  more  seriously  point  out 
the  growing  unreasonableness  of  the 
"  working  classes.''  And  yet  others 
would  lament  the  unfitness  of  women  for 
the  steady  work  of  the  world. 

A  few,  more  imaginative,  would  go 
with  these  striking  girls  into  their  nine- 
hour-a-day  seclusion  and  would  feel  the 
youth  of  them  yearning  for  the  outer 
world;  for  movement,  for  light,  for  life. 
The  dulness  of  it  all,  relieved  by  the  fret- 
ful click  of  signals  and  the  insistent  whis- 
per of  subscribers;  the  weariness  of  it 
all;  the  pathos  of  imprisoned  girlhood 
and  womanhood, — can  you  understand 
these  ? 


Why  to  Strike  35 

It  is  not  given  to  us  that  life  shall  be  a 
merry-making  in  a  rose  garden.  Men 
and  women  must  toil  if  they  would  live. 
Nor  is  there  despair  or  repugnance  in  all 
labour. 

Happily,  too,  youth  is  flexible;  and  in 
real  life  the  burden  is  often  marvellously 
adjusted  to  the  shoulder  that  must  bear 
it.  No  strained  compassion  is  sought 
for  the  army  of  young  women  who  are 
part  of  a  city's  nerve  centres. 

Yet  withal,  unless  your  heart  be  unduly 
hardened,  you  will,  with  but  this  word 
of  admonition,  agree  that  even  the  raising 
of  window  shades — a  glimpse  outward 
into  life  and  light — may  be  such  an  object 
of  desire  as  to  reasonably  lead  to  a  strike, 
when  one  has  no  other  means  of  influencing 
those  who  control  one's  welfare. 

It  will  be  urged  that  the  great  incon- 
venience caused  to  others  should  hold  in 
check  a  body  of  employe's  whose  occupa- 
tion has  to  do  with  a  public  convenience. 
And  in  this  there  is  truth.  The  perfect 
practice  of  self-abnegation  would  prevent 
all  strikes.  But  in  the  world  as  it  is,  this 


36  Strikes 

theory  will  be  vainly  urged  upon  the 
relatively  weak,  who  sometimes  hear  it 
loudly  proclaimed  by  the  relatively  strong. 

Without  preaching  an  impossible  un- 
selfishness, we  may  feel  assured  that  the 
self-interest  of  the  strikers  must  make 
them  fairly  cautious  before  resorting  to  a 
certain  loss  in  order  to  accomplish  an 
uncertain  gain. 

Subject  to  this  check  of  self-interest, 
it  may  fairly  be  stated  that  any  object, 
legal  and  moral  in  itself,  may  be  sought 
by  means  of  the  strike. 

Thus  viewed,  the  question,  "Why  to 
strike,"  requires  no  specific  answer. 
Let  us  strike  for  whatever  we  desire,  if  it 
cannot  otherwise  be  more  easily  obtained ; 
and  if  the  thing  desired  be  not  wrongful. 

Since  very  few  objects  wrongful  in 
themselves  are  at  all  obtainable  by  means 
of  a  strike,  we  may  eliminate  this  rare 
case.  Leave  it  to  the  general  conscience ; 
and  consider  "why  to  strike"  only  from 
the  selfish,  profit-and-loss  point  of  view. 


CHAPTER  VI 

SPECIAL    CAUSES    OF    STRIKES — 
ARBITRATION 

WHILE  recognising  that  anything  may 
properly  be  the  cause  of  a  strike,  it  will 
be  well  to  have  before  us  the  principal 
causes  which  have,  in  fact,  produced  our 
41  labour  wars." 

Demand  for:  (i)  Higher  wages;  (2) 
shorter  hours;  (3)  more  agreeable  condi- 
tions of  employment;  (4)  reinstatement 
of  discharged  employe's;  (5)  recognition 
of  the  union  (in  various  ways) ;  (6)  dis- 
charge of  non-union  men.  These  are  the 
principal  alleged  causes  of  strikes.  The 
last  two  are,  in  fact,  only  means  employed 
for  accomplishing  one  or  the  other  of  the 
first  four  ends.  The  union  exists  for  rais- 
ing wages,  and  bettering  conditions.  A 
struggle  for  the  union  is  an  indirect 
struggle  for  the  objects  of  the  union. 

37 


38  Strikes 

We  must  add  a  seventh  cause,  that  is, 
the  sympathetic  strike. 

In  truth  it  is  not  exactly  what  its  name 
suggests, — as  will  appear  when  we  ana- 
lyse the  matter. 

With  these  headings  before  us,  we  may 
now  ask  whether  arbitration  should  be 
accepted  universally,  once  for  all,  as  a 
cheaper,  wiser  mode  of  settling  differ- 
ences than  the  strike,  with  its  necessary 
losses  imposed  upon  both  parties  ? 

From  the  employees  point  of  view,  yes. 
No  official  board  of  arbitration,  no  fair- 
minded  men  specially  chosen  for  an 
occasion,  will,  in  the  average  case,  fail  to 
do  as  well  or  better  for  the  wage-earner 
than  he  can  do  for  himself  by  a  wasteful 
strike.  He  should  always  try  for  it. 

But  the  employer  must  hesitate ;  some- 
times he  must  refuse  to  submit  to  any  one 
other  than  himself  the  determination 
of  an  intricate  question  involving  his 
financial  existence.  He  knows  that,  in 
general,  no  arbitrator  can  be  supplied 
with  full  information  as  to  the  special 
branch  of  industry  which  is  involved. 


Arbitration  39 

And  if  this  be  supposed,  it  remains  that 
the  arbitrator  will  almost  certainly  be 
unable  to  seize  the  intricate  conditions 
surrounding  the  particular  case — condi- 
tions which  must  be  lived  with  in  order 
that  they  may  be  appreciated. 

And  if,  in  turn,  this  also  be  supposed, 
he  must  hesitate  to  submit  to  another, 
who  has  no  further  interest  or  responsi- 
bility in  the  matter,  questions  of  judg- 
ment such  as  the  quantity  of  reserve 
capital  required;  the  rates  that  may  (or 
must)  be  paid  for  borrowed  money;  the 
character  and  extent  of  repairs;  the  char- 
acter and  extent  of  new  plant  to  be 
purchased;  the  character  and  extent  of 
experimental  work  to  be  done;  the  char- 
acter and  extent  of  changes  to  be  made 
in  the  product  itself;  the  character  and 
extent  of  effort  and  expense  to  be  made 
for  acquiring  a  wider  market;  and  the 
character  and  extent  of  efforts  and 
expense  to  be  made  in  meeting  com- 
petition— that  foe  which  threatens  un- 
ceasingly! Yet  all  these  are  factors 
determining  the  possible  wage  rates. 


40  Strikes 

The  employer  knows,  too,  that  at  times 
the  disclosure  of  intimate  facts  affecting 
his  credit,  even  to  some  official  (but 
always  human)  board,  may  be  followed 
by  prompt  ruin. 

In  a  hundred  ways  which  every  man 
recognises  who  has  himself  had  to  face 
a  balance-sheet,  the  relation  of  the  em- 
ployer to  his  business  is  more  complicated, 
more  delicate,  more  attackable  than  is 
the  relation  of  the  wage-earner. 

For  the  latter  there  is  but  one  ques- 
tion, "Will  this  employer  give  me  more 
money  for  a  day's  work  than  another?" 
Or,  in  another  form,  "  Will  this  employer 
pay  me  in  future  more  than  he  now 
pays  me  for  a  day's  work?  And  if  he 
refuses  me  an  advance,  can  I  get  it  from 
another?" 

As  being  one  who  is  the  weaker 
(considered  individually),  the  employe* 
can  generally  rely  upon  the  sympathy 
of  arbitrators  and  of  the  public.  As 
being  one  of  many,  all  having  political 
power,  he  can  generally  rely  upon  the 
play  of  interest  in  his  favour — as  that 


Arbitration  41 

play  proceeds  in  the  secret  thoughts  of 
any  ambitious  arbitrator. 

To  decide  against  the  workman's 
demands,  the  investigator  must  patiently 
dig  into  many  details  of  wearisome 
complexity.  The  simpler  and  the  more 
popular  course  is  evidently  to  grant  the 
demand. 

All  this  current  that  runs  against  him 
is  known  to  the  employer.  He  must 
therefore  be  very  careful,  if  he  submits 
to  arbitration,  that  exact  and  limiting 
conditions  shall  be  set  about  the  power 
of  the  arbitrators.  And  much  as  he 
may  deplore  a  contest  of  time  with  his 
employe's,  he  must  in  self-preservation 
frequently  prefer  such  a  contest  to  an 
arbitration  in  which  he  surrenders  his 
judgment  and  his  fortunes  to  men  whose 
knowledge  and  information  must  be  less 
than  his,  and  whose  fortunes  are  in  no 
way  involved. 

Often  enough  it  is  not  the  willingness  but 
the  ability  of  an  employer  to  pay  higher 
wages  that  is  the  real  question  at  issue. 
Even  in  the  interest  of  the  wage-earners 


42  Strikes 

themselves,  it  may  be  better  that  an  en- 
terprise should  be  temporarily  shut  down 
by  a  strike  than  that  it  should  be  sub- 
jected, by  arbitration,  to  impossible  con- 
ditions leading  to  ruin  for  all  concerned. 

It  is  plain  that  many  of  the  objec- 
tions to  arbitration,  from  the  employer's 
point  of  view,  do  not  hold  in  case 
he  be  enjoying  a  monopoly.  And  in 
such  case  the  public  as  well  as  the  em- 
ployes may  rightfully  desire  to  know  all 
the  facts  and,  substantially,  to  determine 
the  larger  lines  of  the  conduct  of  any 
legalised  monopoly.  But  this  control 
cannot  be  carried  to  its  limit  unless  at 
the  same  time  a  profit  be  guaranteed  to 
the  enterprise.  If  a  risk  of  loss  be  in- 
volved, then  must  those  who  conduct  the 
enterprise  be  allowed  a  wide  discretion  in 
return  for  that  risk. 

While  it  would  not  be  unwise  to  make 
arbitration  obligatory  upon  certain  statu- 
tory monopolies,  in  making  such  a  pro- 
vision it  should  be  recognised  that 
effective  arbitration  really  involves  pub- 
licity, intentional  or  consequential. 


Arbitration  43 

In  respect  to  this  question  of  the  fair- 
ness of  publicity,  the  most  vexatious 
cases  arise  when  a  practical  monopoly 
is  known  to  exist,  though  not  founded 
on  any  statute.  The  so-called  "Trusts" 
bring  this  difficulty  sharply  before  us. 
It  is  perplexing  to  deal  with  any  hybrid. 
They  are  partly  public,  partly  private 
enterprises.  In  treating  them  justly,  in 
the  one  character,  we  may  treat  them 
unjustly  —  even  destructively  —  in  the 
other. 

It  will  be  difficult  to  frame  a  law  requir- 
ing this  publicity  of  practical — though  not 
legal — monopolies  without  at  the  same 
time  laying  an  almost  insupportable  bur- 
den upon  many  enterprises,  truly  pri- 
vate in  practical  as  well  as  legal  aspects. 
A  grave  discouragement  would  un- 
doubtedly be  added  to  the  many  others 
which  always  threaten,  if  dissatisfaction 
among  employe's  should  necessarily  be 
followed  by  two  separate  evils, — that  of 
having  every  weak  spot  exposed  to  one's 
competitor,  and  that  of  having  control 
of  one's  property  put  into  the  hands  of 


44  Strikes 

those  who  have  neither  the  knowledge 
nor  the  interest  to  assure  wise  action. 

It  will  always  be  difficult  for  employes 
to  understand  the  seriousness  of  these 
considerations.  Those  whose  business 
experience  is  limited  to  a  discussion  of 
the  simple  question  of  "How  much  will 
you  give  me  for  a  day's  labour?"  will 
always  be  unable  to  comprehend  the 
thousand  complications  surrounding  the 
conduct  of  a  large  business — or  even  of  a 
small  one  if  it  is  truly  independent  and 
competitive.  The  employer's  objection 
to  publicity  will  be  construed  as  indicating 
that  he  has  something  dishonest  to  hide. 
His  objection  to  having  arbitrators  fix 
rates  will  be  construed  as  indicating  that 
he  is  unwilling  to  be  fair. 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  publicity  would 
more  frequently  put  some  struggling, 
honest  enterprise  into  the  hands  of  its 
competitors  than  it  would  reveal  any 
misdoing. 

It  is  indeed  a  question  as  to  whether 
competition  and  publicity  can  go  together. 
The  very  end  which  the  public  in  its  own 


Arbitration  45 

interest  wishes  to  preserve  would  often 
be  defeated  by  such  a  requirement. 

Many  a  young  manufacturer  or  mer- 
chant keeps  his  position  safe  against 
attack  just  because  his  more  powerful 
competitors  do  not  know  how  and  where 
he  obtains  help,  and  how  closely  he  is 
"sailing  to  the  wind"  in  the  matter  of 
capital  reserve. 

Experience  has  taught  the  author  that 
all  this  phase  of  our  subject  presents  an 
immense  difficulty  in  the  way  of  effecting 
a  sympathetic  understanding  between 
contending  parties.  So  great  has  it  been 
found  by  others,  that  if  the  employe's 
be  particularly  restricted  in  experience, 
it  has  often  been  thought  best  to  enter 
into  no  argument  or  explanation  with 
employe's  making  unreasonable  demands, 
but  merely  to  say,  "  We  cannot  afford  the 
advance  you  desire.  If  you  insist  upon 
it,  and  if  we  cannot  get  other  workmen, 
we  must  shut  down.'' 

This  seems  an  unlovely  conduct.  It 
is  excusable,  however,  when  the  assertion 
that  "  publicity  may  be  injurious  "  is  met 


46  Strikes 

only  by  the  assertion  that  "  publicity  can- 
not harm  an  honest  man  " ;  and  when  the 
assertion  that  "arbitration  by  impartial 
men  may  yet  mean  control  by  incom- 
petent men  "  is  met  by  the  assertion  that 
"  no  special  competency  is  required  to  run 
any  business;  any  unprejudiced  man  can 
wisely  settle  any  dispute  between  any 
other  two  men." 

The  difference  between  the  opposite 
points  of  view  herein  disclosed  comes 
largely  from  the  difference  in  the  com- 
plexity of  the  affairs  of  the  contestants. 
It  seems  almost  ineradicable. 

We  cannot,  therefore,  look  to  arbitra- 
tion as  the  cure-all  for  labour  troubles. 
It  is  useful.  It  is  the  cheapest  medicine 
of  all.  But  in  some  cases  it  would  kill 
instead  of  cure. 


CHAPTER  VII 

DOES  IT  PAY  ? 

WE  may  now  return  to  the  question, 
"Does  it  pay?"  Let  us  first  consider 
the  case  of  a  direct  strike  for  higher  wages. 

Suppose  we  want  a  ten  per  cent,  in- 
crease. And  suppose  we  get  it  at  the 
end  of  a  month's  strike,  during  which 
there  has  been  a  total  loss  of  wages.  It 
will  require  ten  months  at  the  higher 
rate  merely  to  put  us  even  with  the  loss. 
Beyond  that  period,  the  real  net  gain  is 
enjoyed,  but  not  before. 

A  three-months'  strike  resulting  in  the 
same  increase  (10  %)  does  not  yield  a 
net  gain  before  the  expiration  of  thirty 
months. 

Changes  in  the  general  business  condi- 
tions of  any  country  make  it  difficult  to 
rely  upon  the  maintenance  of  any  general 

47 


48  Strikes 

wage-scale  throughout  a  period  as  long  as 
thirty  months.  Even  if  general  business 
conditions  remain  steady,  the  particular 
industry  in  which  the  strikers  are  em- 
ployed may  be  disturbed.  And  if  the 
particular  industry  should  remain  in 
good  condition,  yet  the  particular  em- 
ployer in  question  may  fall  into  trouble. 

Consider  these  facts,  and  it  will  appear 
that  a  three-months'  strike  for  a  ten 
per  cent,  increase,  even  if  successful,  is 
matter  of  doubtful  wisdom. 

The  doubt  becomes  greater  when  we 
take  into  account  the  probable  suffering 
or  discomfort  that  may  be  borne  during 
the  three  months  of  idleness. 

These  months  as  well  as  those  that 
shall  follow  are  parts  of  life — as  impor- 
tant as  any  other.  They  come,  and  they 
pass.  Their  chief  value  is  in  being  filled 
with  happiness  while  they  pass;  their 
secondary  value  is  in  being  filled  with 
sacrifice  for  future  possible  happiness. 
Some  of  those  who  have  made  the 
sacrifice  will  not  live  long  enough  to 
reap  the  due  reward.  How  narrow, 


Does  It  Pay  ?  49 

then,  is  the  margin  of  true  profit  in  a 
long  strike! 

It  becomes  even  less  when  we  remember 
that  the  very  act  of  enforcing  more  pay 
for  the  employe*,  by  a  strike,  diminishes 
the  ability  of  the  employer  to  pay  at  all. 
The  real  fund  from  which  he  and  the 
employe's  draw  their  wage  is  the  capital 
created  by  their  combined  work.  Plainly 
enough  if  there  be  no  combined  work  there 
will  be  no  wage  fund.  And  if  the  work  be 
done  irregularly — now  a  strike,  now  a  pe- 
riod of  work — it  may  be  impossible  that 
the  employer  should  compete  successfully 
amid  the  uncertainties  and  discourage- 
ments of  such  intermittent  operation. 

Many  an  industry  needs  every  favourable 
condition  in  order  that  it  may  meet  the 
tireless  foe  of  competition. 

Every  wise  labour  leader  will  strive 
to  see  the  employer's  side  of  a  contro- 
versy, and  every  wise  employer  will  try 
to  see  the  workman's  side.  For  they 
are  in  partnership.  Friendship,  not  en- 
mity, should  be  the  normal  relation, 
profitable  for  both.  It  is  unfortunate 


50  Strikes 

that  he  who  has  always  worked  only  for 
wages  (however  high)  can  never  under- 
stand the  trials  of  him  who  is  the  principal 
of  a  business  and  must  find  the  money 
to  meet  the  pay-roll. 

It  may  be  thought  that  whenever  an 
employer  is  known  to  be  making  profits 
higher  than  the  average  return  to  capital, 
the  employe's  should  demand  wages  higher 
than  the  average  paid  to  workmen  of 
corresponding  class  in  other  enterprises. 
In  such  an  idea  there  is,  indeed,  this 
much  of  truth:  strikes  can  succeed  only 
when  directed  against  employers  who  are 
prosperous.  Striking  for  higher  wages 
when  a  business  is  barely  meeting  oper- 
ating expenses  is  almost  as  foolish  as 
trying  to  gather  grapes  from  thistles. 

Several  reasons  may  be  stated  why 
unusual  profits  should  not  be  at  once 
absorbed  by  higher  wages.1 

i  In  systems  of  profit-sharing  and  risk-sharing,  the 
special  prosperity  of  the  employing  enterprise  is  auto- 
matically distributed  between  Capital,  Management, 
and  Labour.  This  is  the  ideal  condition  toward  which 
all  efforts  should  be  directed,  but  it  is  difficult  of 
attainment. 


Does  It  Pay?  51 

Thus,  it  is  necessary  that  occasional 
profits  to  capital  and  management  should 
be  large  in  order  to  cover  the  losses  which 
occur  all  too  frequently.  In  seasons  of 
general  prosperity,  when  labour  is  in 
sharp  demand,  risk  of  loss  in  a  particular 
enterprise  is  borne  almost  entirely  by 
capital  and  management,  not  by  the 
particular  wage-earners  who  may  have 
been  employed  in  the  unfortunate  venture. 

It  is  safe  to  say  that  if  the  hope  of 
unusual  reward  were  taken  away  from 
those  who  initiate  enterprise,  the  world's 
progress  would  be  tremendously  crippled. 

"But,"  you  may  say,  "does  not  this 
hope  lead  men  to  make  foolish  ventures  ? 

"  Are  not  all  ventures  which  fail  proven 
to  be  foolish  ventures? 

"Are  not  the  losses  properly  appor- 
tioned to  those  who  have  shown  lack  of 
wisdom? 

"Would  it  not  be  just  as  well  that  no 
enterprise  should  be  permitted  to  earn 
more  than  the  present  average  return  to 
capital  and  management?" 

And     the    answer    is:     "Who     shall 


52  Strikes 

determine  what  are  wise  enterprises  and 
what  are  foolish? 

"Who  can  know  absolutely  to  what 
depth  a  vein  of  mineral  goes  until  large 
sums  of  money  have  been  spent  in  ex- 
ploring or  working  the  mine? 

"Who  can  foresee  all  the  wars,  all  the 
drouths,  all  the  pestilence,  all  the  migra- 
tions of  people  from  one  country  to 
another  of  from  one  street  to  another? 

"Who  can  know,  without  heroic  effort 
and  great  expenditure,  whether  a  new 
invention,  which  may  be  a  universal 
blessing,  has  or  has  not  the  merit  which 
it  seems  to  possess?" 

The  mines  from  which  men  draw 
wealth  are  tombs  of  broken  hearts.  The 
"scrap-heaps"  of  the  inventor's  work- 
shop are  the  wrecks  of  overworked  minds; 
the  deserted  factories  are  monuments  of 
dead  ambitions. 

The  world  receives  and  enjoys  the  suc- 
cesses; it  forgets  the  agonising  failures 
which  have  marked  the  way  out  of 
ignorance  to  knowledge,  out  of  weakness 
to  strength. 


Does  It  Pay  ?  53 

These  failures  are  the  involuntary 
sacrifices  made  by  individuals  to  the 
progress  of  society.  No  one  is  wise 
enough  to  teach  or  to  learn  success  in  one 
lesson. 

Some  who  read  these  pages  may  inquire, 
"But  cannot  'Government'  direct  all 
these  things  more  wisely?"  And  in  an- 
swer we  need  say  only  this:  "  Government 
is  no  other  than  you  and  your  neighbour. 
Can  you  and  he  set  it  all  right?" 

No,  we  must  go  on  in  the  future  very 
much  as  in  the  past.  Something  more  of 
co-operation  perhaps.  And  this  move- 
ment may  constantly  approach  the  gen- 
eral co-operation  of  Socialism.  But  if 
that  is  the  goal  which  Fate  has  set  before 
us  we  must  be  content  to  slacken  the  pace 
of  scientific  progress.  When  every  man 
shall  be  relieved  from  great  risk  and 
debarred  from  great  success,  there  will 
be  less  effort,  less  ambition;  less  waste 
(perhaps)  and  less  gain;  less  product  and 
— we  hope — more  happiness. 

Let  not  the  honest  worker  who  thinks, 
begrudge  an  occasional  reward  beyond 


54  Strikes 

the  average  to  those  who  strive  beyond 
the  average. 

Another  reason  standing  against  the  im- 
mediate absorption  of  unusual  profits  lies 
in  this,  that  in  many  enterprises  ultimate 
safety  is  to  be  had  only  by  building  up 
large  reserves.  Without  these,  ruin  may 
fall  upon  employer  and  employe*  alike. 

No  man  can  be  sure  as  to  just  how  far 
such  a  policy  should  be  carried,  but  before 
striking  at  the  profits  of  an  employer, 
this  matter  of'  reserve  should  be  well  con- 
sidered. At  a  later  date,  when  some  great 
change  in  plant  is  needed;  when  some 
exceptional  competition  is  to  be  met; 
when  some  great  disaster  by  fire  or  flood 
is  to  be  covered,  this  reserve  fund  may 
be  the  very  force  which  must  be  avail- 
able in  order  to  keep  the  enterprise 
going.  And  in  that  case,  the  employ 6  is 
benefited,  quite  as  much  as  any  one  else, 
by  the  prudence  of  the  manager  who 
did  not  at  once  pay  out  in  dividends  or 
in  increased  wages  every  penny  that  was 
earned  above  the  ordinary  returns  to 
capital. 


CHAPTER  VIII 

CAPITAL  AND  LABOUR 

WIDESPREAD  misunderstanding  of  the 
real  battle  of  labour  is  largely  due  to 
the  common  phrase,  "Capital  versus 
Labour." 

Is  it  really  Capital  that  has  an  interest 
antagonistic  to  that  of  Labour?  The 
matter  is  worth  investigating. 

Labour  means  the  active  working  man 
of  to-day.  Capital  means  the  raw  ma- 
terial of  Nature,  either  unmodified  or 
modified  by  the  man  of  yesterday,  be  he 
dead  or  alive.  We  have  a  considerable 
stock  of  modified  raw  material  (capital) 
because  yesterday  did  not  immediately 
consume  all  that  it  produced. 

Some  of  the  world's  capital  is  held  by 
idlers,  generally  through  inheritance. 

The  idlers  exist  largely  because  of  our 

55 


56  Strikes 

vanity,  and  our  parental  love.  Vanity 
may  be  hurtful,  but  it  is  universal. 
Parental  love  is  helpful,  within  limits, 
and  is  almost  universal.  Both  are  "hu- 
man nature" — found  alike  in  prince  and 
pauper.  Acting  together  they  endow 
children  with  more  property  than  they 
need — if  the  parents  be  rich.  It  is  prob- 
able that  this  right  of  endowment  must 
be  severely  limited.  For  the  present, 
the  subject  goes  over. 

But  most  of  the  world's  capital  is  held 
by  workers. 

The  workers  must  be  roughly  divided 
into  two  classes.  The  larger  class,  nu- 
merically, consists  of  those  who  have 
very  little  capital,  and  who  require  an 
immediate  return  for  their  labour.  They 
are  those  usually  known  as  "wage- 
earners,"  " working  men,"  "operatives," 
or  "employe's."  Generally  they  work 
under  the  direction  of  others.  These 
others  constitute  the  second  class  of 
workers.  Directive  workers  we  may  call 
them.  They  may  have  had  from  their 
parents  even  less  than  the  average 


Capital  and  Labour  57 

support  given  to  the  children  of  wage- 
earners. 

In  the  beginning  of  many  enterprises, 
the  man  who  furnishes  the  Direction  is 
just  as  much  without  capital  as  the 
labourer  whom  he  employs.  But  if  this 
directing  man  (or  boy)  has  health  and 
brains  and  energy  and  thrift,  he  generally 
earns  more  than  he  spends,  and  thus 
becomes  a  "capitalist." 

Every  man  who  earns  more  than  he 
spends  is  a  capitalist.  Every  wage- 
earner  with  a  few  dollars  in  the  savings- 
bank  is  a  capitalist,  for  these  dollars 
represent  property.  Every  carpenter 
owning  a  set  of  tools  is  a  capitalist.  His 
tools  are  iron  ore  (natural  resource) 
modified  by  the  labour  of  yesterday. 

The  average  safe  return  to  capital,  as 
suck,  is  from  two  to  five  per  cent,  per 
annum. 

Is  there  any  serious  quarrel  with  that  ? 

Many  thousands  of  capitalists — that 
is  the  saving  people  all  over  the  world — 
never  get  as  high  a  return  as  four  per 
cent. 


58  Strikes 

And  it  is  to  be  remembered  that  this 
average  return  is  made  up  of  the  high 
and  the  low.  If  you  prevent  the  occa- 
sional high  returns  without  preventing 
an  equal  proportion  of  low  returns,  the 
average  must  be  less  than  it  is  now. 

If  capital,  as  such,  could  not  continue 
to  have  the  average  return  now  received 
by  it,  the  savings-banks  could  not  pay 
the  current  interest  on  deposits. 

The  wage-earner  who  fights  against 
reasonable  returns  to  capital  is  righting 
against  the  majority  of  his  class.  He  is 
fighting  against  giving  reward  to  thrift; 
against  giving  a  rental  for  the  use  of 
tools.  Without  a  rental  they  will  not  be 
supplied  by  Smith,  who  may  have  them, 
to  Jones  who  wants  to  use  them.  Jones 
is  generally  benefited,  more  than  he  is 
injured,  by  paying  rental  for  tools,  or  he 
would  not  take  them. 

The  real  competition  is  between  workers 
and  workers.  As  owners  of  capital,  all 
individuals  of  both  classes  are  interested 
in  allowing  fair  returns  to  that  which  is 
lent  for  hire.  The  question  between 


Capital  and  Labour  59 

them  is,  "What  wage  shall  you  get,  and 
what  wage  shall  I  get?"  rather  than, 
"  What  return  shall  we  pay  to  Capital,  as 
such?" 

That  which  confuses  many  employe's  as 
to  their  relation  toward  capital  is  this — 
that  often  the  "  capitalist "  and  the  "  boss" 
are  one  and  the  same.  If  Mr.  John  Smith 
invests  $100,000  in  any  manufacturing 
business,  and,  being  his  own  manager, 
makes  profits  of  $50,000  a  year,  Mr. 
Smith  the  capitalist  gets  $4000  and  Mr. 
Smith  the  manager  gets  $46,000. 

By  a  strike  for  higher  wages  you  may 
force  him  to  give  up  some  of  the  $46,000, 
but  you  do  not  expect  him  to  cut  into 
the  $4000.  If  you  do,  it  would  be  wise 
to  withdraw  your  money  from  the  sav- 
ings-bank at  once,  and  take  the  sluggard 
rather  than  the  ant  as  your  model  citizen. 

To  put  it  in  another  way — assume 
that  Mr.  Smith  has  $100,000.  He  can 
have  $4000  per  year  without  work. 
Somebody  will  pay  that  for  the  use  of 
his  capital.  If  he  wants  more,  he  must 
work.  He  may  employ  himself  and 


60  Strikes 

lend  to  himself  the  $100,000.  If  he 
be  not  an  intelligent  worker,  he  will 
lose  his  capital.  It  would  have  been 
wiser  to  have  lent  his  money  to  some  one 
else.  If  he  be  clever  and  very  indus- 
trious, then  we  have  the  case  of  the 
strong  man  getting  rich  by  enterprise. 

His  position  as  a  capitalist  follows  from 
his  efforts  as  a  worker. 

He  is  a  bigger  capitalist  than  the 
average  man,  because  he  is  a  bigger 
worker.  Then  his  capital-holding  reacts, 
in  the  total  result,  upon  his  work  done, 
and  we  behold  again  that  "to  him  that 
hath  it  shall  be  given/* 

Capital — his  own  capital — may  be 
worth  more  in  his  skilful  hands  than  it 
could  be  when  employed  by  average  in- 
dustrial capacity. 

So  it  is  with  the  skilful  carpenter. 
His  tools,  cleverly  used  by  himself,  will 
do  far  more  work  in  a  day,  than  when 
hired  to  the  average  journeyman.  The 
happy  marriage  within  his  own  home 
of  native  capacity  to  good  tools,  becomes 
a  fruitful  one.  He  is  on  the  high-road 


UNJVtKbJTY 

V  / 

v^ 

Capital  and  Labour  61 

to  wealth.  His  companion,  less  gifted 
than  he,  may  have  equally  good  tools, 
but  makes  only  half  the  value  created  by 
the  brighter  man. 

So  it  is  throughout  the  working  world. 
One  lawyer  is  paid  ten  times  as  much  as 
another  for  a  day's  work. 

One  man-of-God  is  paid  ten  times  as 
much  as  another  for  preaching  the  same 
gospel  of  poverty. 

The  clever  labourer,  the  clever  me- 
chanic, the  clever  telegrapher,  the  clever 
clerk,  the  clever  lawyer — all  these,  when 
they  have  only  a  little  capital,  are  known 
as  labourer,  mechanic,  telegrapher,  etc., 
etc.  When  they  have  much  capital — 
though  workers  in  one  way  or  another — 
they  are  known  as  "capitalists."  They 
lead  the  other  workers  and  divide  the 
proceeds  with  them.  But  not  always 
is  there  happy  agreement  as  to  the  divi- 
sion. Those  who  have  gone  up  from  the 
ranks  of  "Labour"  are  found,  all  over 
the  world,  as  employers,  striving  with 
poorer  workers  to  settle  questions  of  com- 
pensation. It  is  worker  against  worker. 


CHAPTER  IX 

WHO  WILL  FURNISH  HIGHER  WAGES? 

WE  may  assume  that  the  capitalist, 
as  such,  is  retired  from  the  field  of  inquiry. 
He  is  not  in  question,  because  all  of  us 
are  capitalists — all  except  the  tramp, 
happier,  perhaps,  than  we. 

How  much  more  can  ordinary  wage- 
earners  take  from  the  general  product 
than  is  now  received  by  them? 

Moral  and  legal  is  the  strike  for  higher 
wages.  Profitable  it  may  be,  and  some- 
times is.  But  to  what  limit  may  it — or 
any  other  wage-raising  device — be  pushed 
before  reaching  the  point  where  failure 
will  be  due  to  an  exhaustion  of  the  sup- 
ply of  product  assignable  to  the  pay  of 
labour  ? 

Between  what  classes  of  people  is  the 

product  now  divided  ? 
62 


Who  Will  Pay  Higher  Wages  ?    63 

It  has  already  been  pointed  out  that 
there  are  two  classes  of  workers, — those 
who  plan  and  direct,  and  those  who 
execute,  the  world's  work. 

Is  not  this  true  within  the  labour  union 
itself?  Let  us  develop  the  subject  some- 
what further. 

Some  workers  will  be  found  in  a  neutral 
ground  between  the  two  well-marked 
types.  The  foreman  who  controls  a 
gang  of  ten  or  twenty  labourers;  the 
locomotive  engineer  who  controls  a  fire- 
man; the  railway  conductor  who  controls 
a  train-gang — all  these  wage-earners  have 
mixed  functions.  In  part  they  merely 
execute,  by  hand  or  tongue,  the  direc- 
tions of  others ;  in  part  they  are  themselves 
the  source  of  direction  for  subordinates. 
No  hard-and-fast  distinction  can  be  made. 

However,  we  may  say  that  those  who 
plan  enterprises,  and  those  who  must 
largely  exercise  discretion  in  the  guidance 
of  their  own  acts,  or  those  of  subordi- 
nates, constitute  the  class  whom  we 
designate  as  directive  labourers.  They 
may  be  railway  presidents  or  newsboys, 


64  Strikes 

promoters  of  railways  (that  is,  those  who 
conceive  the  idea  and  raise  the  money), 
bankers,  contractors,  merchants  (whether 
running  a  corner  grocery  or  a  big  depart- 
ment store).  Even  the  newsboy,  who 
is  a  self-directed  worker,  taking  the  risk 
on  his  purchase  of  morning  papers,  may 
be  said  to  be  in  the  same  classification 
with  Mr.  Rockefeller,  who  risked  his 
young  fortune  in  oil.  The  highly-paid 
mason,  who  waits  for  some  one  else  to 
plan  a  building  and  find  the  money  for 
its  construction,  is  put  under  less  men- 
tal strain  than  the  youth  who  ventures 
his  own  judgment  and  his  own  small 
hoard  in  some  humble,  but  independent 
enterprise. 

The  one,  when  he  lays  down  his  trowel, 
may  dismiss  every  care  for  the  day. 
The  other  must  ever  be  ready  to  burn 
the  midnight  oil  in  planning  for  the 
morrow. 

The  one  lives  in  a  ready-made  world. 
The  other  helps  to  make  it.  Each,  in 
his  own  way,  is  essential  to  the  life  of 
society  as  we  find  it. 


Who  Will  Pay  Higher  Wages  ?     65 

Vain  would  be  the  projects  of  a  Rocke- 
feller if  there  were  not  strong  arms  and 
deft  hands  to  tap  the  oil,  to  lay  the  pipe, 
to  shovel  the  coal,  to  steer  the  ships,  to 
write  the  accounts,  to  send  the  tele- 
grams, to  tighten  the  barrels,  to  drive 
the  waggons,  to  collect  the  bills,  to  cook 
the  food. 

A  thousand  capacities,  talents,  and  for- 
titudes must  be  enlisted,  together  with 
mere  brute  strength  of  arm,  in  order 
that  a  single  train  may  speed  over  the 
railroad  which  has  been  planned  by  the 
far-seeing  promoter  and  financed  by 
the  courageous  banker.  We  are,  indeed, 
all  companions-in-arms,  and  our  battle  is 
against  hunger,  thirst,  cold,  and  a  myriad 
of  desires  for  love,  power,  beauty.  That 
is  the  battle  of  Life.  Generals,  colonels, 
majors,  captains,  lieutenants,  sergeants, 
corporals,  and  privates  are  we — many 
grades,  and  but  one  army. 

No  booty  can  be  had  except  by  com- 
bined effort  of  all  those  grades.  Not 
every  man  is  capable  of  planning  the 
campaign.  Not  every  man  is  capable  of 


66  Strikes 

controlling  a  regiment — a  company — 
a  platoon.  Not  every  striker  can  wisely 
conduct  a  strike.  Not  every  wage-earner 
has  the  qualities  that  make  a  labour 
leader.  And  if,  indeed,  these  capacities 
exist  in  many,  yet  economy  in  the  use 
of  available  forces,  and  effectiveness  of 
execution,  would  require  that  only  a  few 
should  actually  be  assigned  to  directive 
functions,  while  the  many  must  be  em- 
ployed in  carrying  out  the  plans  of  the 
few. 

It  is  probable  that  the  relatively  free 
competition  of  our  present  organisation 
of  society  affords  an  excellent  means  of 
selecting  the  officers  of  the  army.  The 
process  is  in  large  part  that  which  takes 
place  in  the  "struggle  for  existence" 
among  all  living  things.  In  large  part 
it  results  in  a  "survival  of  the  fittest." 

There  is  indeed  one  serious  departure 
from  this  process — that  due  to  the  inheri- 
tance of  fortune.  The  son  who  is  per- 
mitted to  take  his  father's  wealth  becomes 
either  an  idle  holder  of  capital,  or  he 
becomes  an  "officer,"  whether  capa- 


Who  Will  Pay  Higher  Wages  ?    67 

ble  or  not.  Even  though  unfit,  years 
or  generations  may  pass  ere  society  can 
eliminate  him  from  his  post.  This  seri- 
ous question  will  be  relegated  to  a  later 
inquiry,  in  another  work.  No  final  ad- 
justment of  wealth  distribution  can  be 
made  before  the  inheritance  question 
shall  have  received  attention.  But  the 
scope  of  this  treatise  forbids  its  thorough 
study. 

Another  disturbance  of  the  rule  of 
sound  choice  of  leaders  results  from  the 
caprice  of  nature.  The  prospector  who 
chances  to  discover  a  rich  vein  of  gold  is 
not  thereby  proven  to  be  more  capable 
than  his  companion  who  just  misses  it. 
Yet  he  becomes  an  officer  of  our  industrial 
army.  Here  again  we  shall  now  merely 
touch  upon  an  important  subject. 

It  will  be  possible  to  conclude  an  in- 
quiry for  present  guidance  in  the  mat- 
ter of  strikes  without  reconstruction  of 
society. 

Let  us  assume  that  the  method  of 
choosing  officers  is  not  now  to  be  changed. 
We  may  yet  inquire — and  we  do  now 


68  Strikes 

persistently  inquire — how  the  relative 
pay  of  officers  and  men  shall  be  deter- 
mined. To-day  it  is  a  catch-as-catch- 
can  determination. 

To  a  large  degree,  it  must  remain  so  in 
any  competitive,  private-property  organi- 
sation of  industry.  For  if  the  state 
shall  undertake  to  determine  the  profits 
of  each  person,  it  makes  itself  responsible 
for  all  individual  remunerations,  and 
must  control  all  industry  in  order  to 
make  good  its  guaranty.  Just  in  so  far 
as  it  now  fixes  the  remuneration  of  its 
direct  employes,  so  is  it  forced  corre- 
spondingly to  intervene  in  private  busi- 
ness, and  raise  money  for  the  payment 
of  its  salaries. 

As  to  how  far  the  state  shall  go  in 
employing  individuals — hence  in  paying 
them  and  in  taxing  citizens  to  provide 
this  payment — is  not  this  the  very  heart 
of  most  of  our  political  struggles  ? 

Here  again  we  shall  assume  no  imme- 
diate and  considerable  change  in  present 
conditions.  We  shall  suppose  about  the 
same  ratio  of  state  activity  to  private 


Who  Will  Pay  Higher  Wages  ?    69 

activity  as  now  exists  in  Europe  and 
America.  In  these  states  the  amount  of 
property  which  each  man  may  call  his 
own  as  the  sun  goes  down  on  his  labour 
must  be  chiefly  determined  by  private 
contract  between  himself  and  others. 

What  indication  have  the  wage-earners 
(the  privates  and  corporals  of  our  indus- 
trial army)  as  to  the  limits  of  demand 
they  may  wisely  make  in  these  contracts  ? 

It  is  plain,  as  has  been  indicated,  that 
neither  could  afford  to  lose  the  service  of 
the  other.  The  private  needs  the  general ; 
the  general  needs  the  private,  and  both 
want  all  they  can  get. 

Such  a  declaration  may  seem  harsh ;  it 
may  seem  equivalent  to  a  refusal  to  rec- 
ognise the  common  human  kindness  of  our 
race.  Yet  how  can  we  fail  to  accept  it 
as  expressing  the  usual  rule  of  action? 
How  can  we  fail  to  see  that  this  rule, 
and  not  its  exceptions,  should  be  consid- 
ered in  a  serious  study  of  our  problems? 

The  man  who  receives  one  dollar  a  day 
wants  more  because  his  crudest  necessi- 
ties of  life  are  in  peril. 


70  Strikes 

The  man  who  has  five  dollars  a  day 
wants  more  because  a  hundred  tempting 
comforts  and  little  luxuries  are  just 
beyond  his  means,  and  old  age  waits  in 
front  to  take  away  his  income. 

The  man  who  has  twenty  dollars  a  day 
is  in  full  rivalry  for  the  "good  things" 
of  life,  and  seeks  to  ''establish"  his 
family. 

The  man  who  has  five  hundred  dollars 
a  day  has  full  provisions  of  all  lux- 
uries, but  aims  now  at  power  or  large 
philanthropy. 

The  man  who  has  five  thousand  dollars 
a  day  is  a  great  power,  and,  though  per- 
haps giving  lavishly  with  one  hand,  must 
continue  to  make  prudent  contracts  with 
the  other,  else  he  may  debauch  the  in- 
dustrial system  around  him,  bringing 
disorder  and  distress  into  thousands  of 
less  successful  lives.  So  long  as  he  buys 
and  sells,  he  must  see  that  he  gets  a  fair 
"value  received,"  or  he  will  corrupt  his 
surroundings. 

Indeed  the  very  service  which  he  may 
best  perform  for  all  of  us  might  be  lost 


Who  Will  Pay  Higher  Wages  ?     71 

should  he  clfcse  to  observe  the  methods 
by  which  he  has,  presumably,  contributed 
to  the  wealth  of  society.  He  may  con- 
tinue to  be  an  ideal  leader  of  a  brigade  of 
our  army,  but  only  on  condition  that 
downright  charity  shall  be  in  one  depart- 
ment of  his  activity,  and  productive 
business  in  another.  Liberality,  but 
not  charity,  should  mark  his  business 
dealings. 

Often  must  he  refuse  the  demands  of 
some  who  look  to  him,  if  he  would  remain 
in  position  to  profitably  direct  all  who 
look  to  him. 

And  so  it  is  that  private  contracts, 
even  with  the  philanthropist,  must 
generally  result  from  contest  and  com- 
promise. And  contest  is  of  the  very 
essence  of  liberty.  We  may,  and  do, 
profit  our  weary  souls  by  giving  up  some 
liberty  and  escaping  some  contest.  Let 
us  remember  that  if  we  entirely  escape 
the  contest  we  shall  entirely  sacrifice  the 
liberty. 

If  the  man  who  is  earning  five  dollars  a 
day  desires  to  know  whether  society  can 


72  Strikes 

*. 

afford  to  pay  him  six  do'H^fc;  instead  of 
five,  he  should  look,  not  to  what  the 
generals  are  receiving,  but  to  what  they 
are  spending.  Under  our  present  system 
of  private  property,  the  very  efficiency 
and  usefulness  to  you  of  the  Captain 
of  Industry  is  (generally)  measured  by 
the  amount  of  property  which  passes 
under  his  control. 

Save  by  way  of  inheritance  or  the  rare 
chance  of  adventure,  or  of  special  privi- 
lege from  the  state,  no  man  becomes 
the  owner  of  large  fractions  of  society's 
product  who  has  not  largely  served 
society  in  production.  He  is  command- 
ing more  troops  than  another  (in  the 
handling  of  his  property)  because  he  has 
proved  his  ability  to  command. 

He  who  has  wealth  measured  as  five 
thousand  dollars  may  command  the 
services  of  about  four  thousand  common 
labourers  for  one  day.  Or  he  may  com- 
mand, let  us  say,  two  thousand  average 
wage-earners,  for  one  day. 

Now  our  true  interest  lies,  not  so  much 
in  taking  away  these  commands  from 


Who  Will  Pay  Higher  Wages  ?    73 

competenWjBfers,  as  in  seeing  that  the 
two  thousand  men  be  employed  usefully 
to  the  general  average  of  us.  The  mere 
power  over  these  men  may  be  left  to  a 
leader,  provided  he  keeps  his  brigade  at 
what  we  shall  call  useful  work. 

Well,  what  shall  we  call  useful  work? 

Shall  we  thus  class  the  one  hundred 
men  who  may  be  serving  our  leader  as 
lackeys? 

And  the  twenty  men  who  may  be 
engaged  in  digging  and  polishing  dia- 
monds to  deck  the  bodies  of  our  leader's 
women  ? 

And  the  twenty  men  who  may  be 
engaged  in  singing  and  dancing  for  the 
amusement  of  these  women  ? 

And  the  thirty  men  who  may  be 
engaged  in  decorating  and  repairing  the 
sheltering  roof  of  the  leader's  family  ? 

And  the  thirty  men  who  may  be 
engaged  in  trapping  birds  in  the  tropics, 
beasts  in  the  Arctic,  and  worms  in  the 
middle  zone  for  the  head-gear  and  body- 
gear  of  his  women? 

Nay,  these  are  not  usefully  occupied. 


74  Strikes 

But,  say  they  of  small  wSpiff,  does  not 
the  rich  man  support  these  two  hundred  ? 
Is  he  not  doing  well  to  keep  them  alive? 
And  the  answer  is,  that  these  men  eat 
grain  which  has  been  planted  by  other 
workers,  and  are  clothed  by  the  labour  of 
others. 

The  rich  man,  who  controls  many, 
virtually  directs  certain  farmers  and 
weavers  to  support  these  two  hundred 
who  live  for  his  pleasure.  He  has  the 
legal  right  to  do  this.  Perhaps  he  has 
added  the  value  of  two  hundred  men's 
work — and  more  besides — to  the  world's 
wealth. 

But  as  long  as  he  does  it,  the  man  who 
receives  three  dollars  may  hope  for  four, 
and  ask  for  four,  and  strike  for  four. 

Why?  Because  if  the  two  hundred 
men  would  stop  Imnting  diamonds  and 
aigrettes,  if  they  would  cease  running  a 
thousand  futile  errands,  if  they  would 
in  general  end  their  task  of  painting  the 
lily  of  luxury,  then  they  might  be  engaged 
in  making  more  ordinary  coats  and  hats, 
in  building  more  ordinary  comfortable 


Who  Will  Pay  Higher  Wages  ?    75 

houses,  in  producing  more  ordinary  com- 
forting food.  And  if  there  were  but  more 
of  these  common  comforts  in  the  world 
(and  not  so  many  diamonds)  then  our 
three  -  dollar  -  a  -  day  friend  could  have 
more  of  them.  And  that  is  what  he 
wants.  And  that  is  what  is  meant 
when  an  increase  of  a  dollar  a  day  is 
properly  interpreted  into  the  language  of 
the  household. 

Let  us  suppose  that  the  two  hundred 
men  who  have  heretofore  served  the 
leader's  personal  wants  be  now  directed 
to  the  supply  of  materials  desired  by  the 
"common  herd."  Let  us  suppose  that 
they  do  nothing  more  than  support 
themselves  in  the  true  sense  of  the  word. 

That  is,  instead  of  hunting  diamonds  or 
polishing  automobile  brasses,  they  raise 
corn  and  weave  clothes,  and  make  shoes 
sufficient  for  two  hundred  ordinary  peo- 
ple. Then  it  is  clear  that  the  common 
materials  heretofore  supplied  to  them 
by  the  labour  of  others  may  be  kept  by 
the  original  producers,  or,  in  part,  distrib- 
uted to  other  wage-earners — a  consum- 


76  Strikes 

mation  most  devoutly  to  be  wished  for. 

From  this  point  of  view  it  may  be 
said  that  the  employer  of  these  two 
hundred  men  does  really  consume  their 
possible  product  in  the  common  things 
of  life. 

Until  we  give  a  full  belly,  a  warm  body, 
a  separate  room,  and  a  good  book  to 
every  human  being  willing  and  able  to 
work,  we  may  doubt  whether  diamond 
diggers,  aigrette  hunters,  lace  makers,  and 
lackeys  are  being  profitably  employed. 

It  is  not  forgotten  that  the  poor  have 
always  delighted  in  display.  To  them 
it  is  at  once  a  symbol  and  a  reality.  It 
is  the  very  substance  of  things  hoped 
for,  and  the  sign  of  a  state  of  bliss  vaguely 
imagined  and  intensely  longed  for.  To 
destroy  display  would  take  out  of  the 
lives  of  many  the  visible  proof  of  value 
in  human  life  as  they  measure  it.  So 
powerful  is  this  sentiment  that  the 
majority  of  those  whose  lives  are  una- 
dorned do  willingly  vote  supplies  to 
their  Rulers,  with  express  condition  that 
these  other  chosen  lives  shall  be  adorned 


Who  Will  Pay  Higher  Wages  ?     77 

with  pomp  and  tinsel.  These  Rulers 
become  priests  of  the  poor,  gorgeously  to 
officiate  in  the  temple  of  the  God  of 
Plenty.  Only  a  few  may  enter  there, 
but  the  presence  of  even  a  few  inspires 
all  with  hope,  and  assures  them  that  a 
material  Heaven  is.  So  there  is  no  envy 
when  the  priest  is  chosen  by  the  people. 

Corrupting  extravagance  has  been 
excused  by  many  political  economists, 
because  "it  gives  employment  to  the 
poor.'*  In  all  the  arguments  to  this 
effect  there  is  no  truth  save  this,  that 
those  workers  who  are  actually  now 
engaged  in  the  production  of  luxuries 
for  the  rich  might  indeed  suffer  somewhat 
during  any  period  of  sharp  decline  in  the 
demand  for  such  luxuries.  The  present 
would  suffer  for  the  sins  of  the  past. 

So  grave  might  this  suffering  be,  so 
difficult  any  quickly  enforced  adjustment 
that  even  the  most  Spartan  reformer 
must  hesitate  to  advise  any  course  which 
would  at  once  throw  out  of  work  the 
thousands  who  are  skilled  only  in  the 
crafts  patronised  by  Dives.  Diamond 


78  Strikes 

diggers,  aigrette  hunters,  and  lackeys 
cannot,  in  the  twinkling  of  an  eye,  turn 
to  farming,  weaving,  or  shoe-making. 

But  we  should  not  permit  these  con- 
siderations to  obscure  our  vision  as  to  the 
future.  We  should  not  fail  to  urge 
voluntary  diminishment  of  extravagance ; 
and  if  this  be  not  effective,  to  urge  for 
continuously  higher  wages  to  the  ordi- 
nary worker,  so  that  the  means  for  ex- 
travagance shall  not  be  so  largely  placed 
in  the  hands  of  those  who  take  joy  only 
in  the  tinsel  things  of  life. 

Yes,  we  may  urge  this  restraint  and 
this  redistribution  of  labour  and  wealth. 

But  what  if  the  gifted  inventors  and 
the  great  organisers  of  business  (true 
"labour  leaders"  these)  should  refuse 
their  service  unless  they  be  permitted  to 
keep  the  two  hundred  men  busy  in  the 
supply  of  luxury  to  themselves  and  their 
women  ? 

Truly,  we  must  bargain  with  them. 
How  great  their  value  is  to  us  no  man 
can  say. 

The  three  elements  of  the  problem  are: 


Who  Will  Pay  Higher  Wages  ?     79 

First. — How  much  does  the  superior 
man  increase  the  world's  production 
over  that  which  would  be  due  to  the 
average  work  of  the  ordinary  man? 

Second. — How  much  does  the  superior 
man  consume  (in  necessities  and  luxu- 
ries) beyond  the  average  consumption  of 
the  ordinary  man? 

Third. — How  much  of  the  world's  pro- 
duction does  the  superior  man  merely 
control  (without  consuming  it),  satisfied 
with  the  power  of  directing  capital  for 
further  production? 

More  briefly  we  may  ask — What  does 
he  add?  What  does  he  subtract?  That 
which  he  merely  holds  and  directs  as  our 
agent  is  still  ours,  and  its  use  must  be 
of  general  benefit.  Curtailment  of  this 
control  may  be  important  politically 
— that  is,  he  who  thus  controls  may 
offend  merely  by  being  too  powerful — 
but  just  now  we  are  inquiring  as  to  how 
much  of  production  is  consumed  away 
from  us,  thus  rendered  unavailable  for 
increase  of  wages. 

How  much  does  the  superior  man  add  ? 


8o  Strikes 

We  cannot  say  exactly.  Yet  a  little 
thought  makes  one  feel  that  without  him 
the  ordinary  man  would  probably  starve 
in  all  parts  of  the  world  save  a  few  regions 
of  easy  climate  and  "volunteer"  crops. 
Remember  that  to  the  common  labourer 
or  other  employe*  at  the  bottom  of  the 
series,  his  foreman  is  the  first  superior 
man.  To  the  foreman  his  superintendent 
is  the  first  superior  man.  To  the  super- 
intendent, his  manager;  to  the  manager, 
his  general  manager ;  to  the  general  mana- 
ger, that  employer  (president  or  owner) 
who  has  planned  and  toiled  and  risked 
all.  And  there  are  the  inventors,  toiling 
in  garrets — later,  perhaps,  in  palaces — to 
materialise  the  ideas,  which  are  the  forces 
with  which  we  conquer  Nature.  How 
shall  we  measure  their  production?  And 
there  are  the  pure  scientists — poor  scien- 
tists sometimes,  in  property — who  study 
the  intricacies  of  Nature's  laws,  turning 
over  to  the  inventor  the  information  out 
of  which  his  ideas  are  born.  Without 
such  men,  might  we  not  still  be  in  breech- 
clouts — all  of  us? 


Who  Will  Pay  Higher  Wages  ?    81 

Must  we  not  exercise  the  very  great- 
est care  to  preserve  conditions  permitting 
these  superior  men  to  be  born,  and  per- 
mitting their  faculties  to  be  usefully 
applied?  Even  if  we  charge  them  with 
selfishness  in  respect  to  the  rewards  they 
demand,  must  we  not,  in  our  own  wise 
selfishness,  hesitate  long  before  we  reject 
those  demands? 

Should  not  the  ordinary  man  study 
the  "  human  nature  "  of  the  much-needed 
extraordinary  man  with  the  same  cold 
utilitarian  motive  which  directs  the  study 
of  climate  and  of  soil?  Shall  we  shut 
our  eyes  to  the  fact  that  in  order  to  live 
at  all  we  must  deal  with  a  thousand 
varying  capacities  among  men,  and  a 
thousand  varying  motives? 

Among  those  who  work  under  foreman, 
superintendent,  and  manager,  are  the 
millions  of  wage-earners  for  whom  and 
by  whom  the  strike  and  the  union  exist. 

They  act  together;  they  may  seem  to 
be  a  uniform  mass,  yet  a  thousand  grades 
of  physical  and  mental  value  go  to  make 
up  their  aggregate  productive  capacity. 


82  Strikes 


Whether  we  will  or  not,  we  are  various ; 
we  are  not  uniform  in  strength  for  the 
battle  of  life. 

Now  let  the  stronger  and  the  wiser, 
even  of  these  millions  of  directed  men  and 
women,  ask  themselves  this  question — 
"What  would  become  of  us  if  every 
one  of  us, — dirt-diggers,  dish-washers, 
street-cleaners,  stokers,  coal-miners,  farm- 
hands, brakemen,  mill-workers,  packers, 
teamsters,  longshoremen — were  reduced 
in  capacity  to  the  level  of  the  least 
efficient  among  us? 

"What  would  be  the  world's  produc- 
tion if  none  of  us — locomotive  engineers, 
painters,  machinists,  carpenters,  masons, 
typographers,  stenographers,  telegraph- 
ers— were  cleverer  than  poor  Smith, 
whose  dulness  and  laziness  almost  ex- 
haust our  helpful  sympathy?  We  may 
know  that  he  can't  help  being  what  he  is, 
but  what  would  the  world  be  if  all  were 
like  him?" 

Let  the  foreman  of  ten  ask  himself  this 
question — "What  progress  could  I  make 
on  this  job  if  I  did  not  give  the  word  of 


Who  Will  Pay  Higher  Wages  ?     83 

command  to  every  thoughtless,  careless 
workman?"  Let  the  superintendent  ask 
himself  this  question — "What  progress 
could  I  make  on  this  job  if  I  did  not 
continually  lay  out  and  inspect  the  work 
of  each  foreman?  And  what  waste  and 
loss  in  the  world's  production  would 
occur  if  I  could  not  shift  these  foremen 
and  draw  the  better  men  up  from  the 
ranks?" 

Is  not  every  employer  on  the  alert  to 
discover  competency,  industry,  reliability 
among  his  subordinates? 

Is  not  the  history  of  the  race  full  of 
sad  stories  of  loss,  of  failure,  because  the 
right  man,  the  competent  man,  was  not  in 
charge  of  this  or  that  enterprise  ? 

Is  not  one  housewife,  one  general,  one 
business  manager  found  to  conduct  ad- 
mirably a  house,  an  army,  or  a  business, 
with  resources  not  larger  than  are  in  the 
hands  of  another  housewife,  general,  or 
manager,  who  miserably  fails  in  the  task? 

Is  not  one  locomotive  equal  in  trans- 
portation work  to  thousands  of  men? 
And  is  not  the  locomotive,  in  its 


84  Strikes 

invention,  in  its  design  and  manufacture, 
and  in  its  operation,  the  child  of  the 
unusual  man? 

Let  the  whole  world  of  salaried  people 
ask  themselves  these  questions:  "Have 
I  the  strength  to  bear  the  strains  of  risk? 
Have  I  the  peculiar  quality  of  leadership  ? 
Have  I  the  imagination,  controlled  by 
judgment,  which  must  go  to  the  planning 
of  this  enterprise  which,  somehow,  fur- 
nishes me  employment?  Can  I  invent 
a  machine  to  cheaply  shape  this  stubborn 
material?" 

Truly,  one  cannot  measure  the  value 
of  what  he  adds — he,  the  superior  man. 
Some  glimpse  we  may  have  of  it  by  noting 
the  poverty  of  those  societies  in  which 
ambition  for  military  or  political  or 
religious  honour  has  for  a  time  drawn 
away  from  production  a  large  majority 
of  the  active  minds  found  in  the  land. 

Europe  in  the  early  Middle  Ages  tells 
us  how  poor  in  value  was  the  average 
human  life  when  the  commercial  classes 
were  despised;  how  vain  were  the  efforts 
of  religion  to  cheer  ignorant  peoples  until 


Who  Will  Pay  Higher  Wages  ?    85 

the  trading  republics  of  Italy  had  relighted 
the  torch  of  civilisation.  That  torch 
was  seen  to  be  held  in  the  hands  of 
him  who  directed  human  labour  to  high 
production. 

Accuracy  in  this  matter  is  indeed 
beyond  us.  Yet  reflection  will  cause 
most  men  to  agree  that  a  great  invention, 
a  great  business  plan,  may  annually  add 
to  the  general  fund  much  more  than  the 
value  of  the  labour  of  two  hundred  or- 
dinary men.  And  observation  will  tell 
us  that  the  men  who  thus  add  to  our  store 
are  rarely  those  who  largely  waste  that 
which  they  have  helped  to  create. 

Power  over  it  they  desire,  and  that 
respect  which  special  ability  commands 
when  it  shows  the  fruit  of  its  labour. 
But  senseless  luxury  is  usually  despised 
by  the  real  workers — those  who  have 
spent  weary  hours,  days,  years  in  plan- 
ning and  directing  the  great  workings 
of  their  time.  Sometimes  they  gratify 
a  costly  whim.  Often  they  cater  to  the 
vanity  of  their  women.  Generally,  how- 
ever, the  habit  of  reasonable  economy 


86  Strikes 

is  fixed  upon  them.  It  is  only  when 
special  privilege  or  effortless  inheritance 
have  endowed  the  slothful  with  much 
property  that  we  see  those  glaring  exam- 
ples of  luxurious  waste  which  stir  the 
philosopher  in  his  study  and  the  work- 
man at  his  bench. 

It  has  already  been  said  that  those 
two  questions  must  be  later  treated  by 
society.  The  issue  is  more  urgent  in 
Europe  than  in  America,  because  privi- 
lege and  inheritance  have  there  exerted 
more  widespread  influence  than  in  the 
new  world. 

Just  now  we  may  perhaps  conclude 
that  the  true  labour  leaders — that  is,  the 
inventors  and  the  managers  (in  all  then- 
grades) — probably  add  to,  far  more  than 
they  subtract  from,  the  general  store 
of  wealth. 

Now  the  principal  tools  which  they 
use  for  production  are  other  men.  The 
figure  of  speech  may  be  permitted,  al- 
though it  is  not  forgotten  that  these 
tools  are  the  co-operators  of  him  who 
uses  them.  They  are  men  who  will 


Who  Will  Pay  Higher  Wages?    87 

share  with  their  Director  the  common 
fruit  of  their  toil.  And  both  will  con- 
tribute to  the  support  of  certain  parasites 
whom  we  have  not  yet  learned  how  to  kill 
without  hurting  ourselves. 

Now,  if  the  Director's  tools  are  good, 
the  total  production  will  be  high.  If 
they  are  bad,  total  production  will  be 
low. 

The  wants  of  the  Director  for  his  own 
consumption  will  remain  substantially 
the  same  in  either  case.  That  which  is 
left  over  after  this  approximately  con- 
stant consumption  has  been  satisfied 
constitutes  a  store  from  which  increase 
of  wages  may  be  drawn. 

Hence  if  you,  the  wage-earner,  would 
have  a  larger  wage-fund,  let  your  work  in 
co-operation  with  him  who  directs  it  be 
as  productive  as  possible.  Do  not  restrict, 
but  endeavour  to  augment  your  individual 
output.  Then  will  your  share  be  greater 
in  a  greater  store. 

If  the  brick-layer  will  lay  one  thousand 
bricks  per  day,  instead  of  six  hundred, 
there  will  in  the  end  be  more  comfortable 


88  Strikes 

quarters  for  all  workmen.  Nothing  can 
defeat  this  rule,  always  saving  the  effect 
of  special  privilege  and  effortless  inheri- 
tance, both  of  which  causes  should  be 
(and  one  of  which  is)  fairly  well  limited 
in  our  modern  democracies. 

But  to  all  this  you  may  say — "  Do  we 
not  get  the  services  of  judges,  of  cabinet 
ministers,  of  legislators  for  a  small  frac- 
tion of  the  sum  paid  to,  and  consumed 
by,  the  great  captains  of  industry  ?  Are 
not  those  public  officers  called  upon  to 
work  as  severely,  and  with  as  much 
originality  as  the  big  employer?  Should 
he  not  be  held  within  those  limits  of 
compensation  which  satisfy  those  public 
servants  ?  In  the  United  States  may  not 
that  limit  be,  let  us  say,  $25,000  per 
year?" 

And  the  answer  is — first  the  work  is 
not  as  hard  or  as  original  as  that  of  the 
captain  of  industry.  And  it  does  not 
involve  the  strain  and  risk  that  go  with 
private  enterprise.  Every  wage-earner, 
in  private  life,  is  under  greater  strain  than 
the  most  elevated  state-employe*,  whose 


Who  Will  Pay  Higher  Wages  ?     89 

"job"  is  practically  secure.  Second, 
without  destroying  the  present  basis  of 
our  whole  fabric  of  industry,  without 
upsetting  the  little  groceryman,  as  well 
as  the  merchant  prince,  you  cannot  put 
these  men  on  salaries.  Nor  can  you 
practically  contract  with  them  that  they 
may  control,  as  their  private  property, 
but  for  your  general  use,  five  million 
dollars'  worth  of  wealth,  while  consuming 
only  $25,000  worth  of  this  property 
every  year. 

Something  of  the  sort  has  been  at- 
tempted by  various  sumptuary  laws; 
the  effect  has  been  generally  disastrous, 
though  the  efforts  have  been  less  drastic 
than  would  be  involved  in  such  a  rule 
as  that  just  suggested.  The  sentiment 
of  service  is  growing — of  service  by  each 
for  all.  Those  to  whom  nature  has 
given  strength  now  tend  to  use  it  for 
others. 

This  sentiment  of  service,  aided  by  the 
steady  pressure  of  the  wage-earners'  de- 
mands, will  limit  the  material  compensa- 
tion exacted  by  the  superior  man.  Partly 


90  Strikes 

through  compulsion,  partly  through  de- 
sire, he  will  take  a  little  less  property — a 
little  more  popularity. 

Accepting  then  the  theory  that  leaders 
generally  add  more  than  they  subtract, 
and  that  their  product  will  increase 
with  the  efficiency  of  their  employe's, 
and  that  the  actual  consumption  by 
them  will  not  increase  in  due  ratio  with 
this  product,  we  see  that  the  efficiency 
of  ike  wage-earner  sets  the  limit — more 
than  any  other  one  controllable  condition 
— to  the  fund  out  of  which  may  come  any 
increase  of  consumption  by  the  wage- 
earner^ 

So  the  leader  of  a  labour  union  is 
supposed  to  add  in  value  to  the  labour 
movement  more  than  he  subtracts  by 
consuming  his  salary.  And  so  also  his 
results  will  be  greater  in  proportion  to 
the  enthusiasm,  intelligence,  and  indus- 
trious co-operation  of  the  members  who 
elect  him.  The  product  to  be  manufac- 
tured is  improvement  of  the  wage-earner's 
condition.  The  labour-leader's  tools  in 
the  manufacture  of  this  product  are  his 


Who  Will  Pay  Higher  Wages  ?    91 

constituents;  dull  tools  make  poor  pro- 
duct; keen  tools  make  good  product. 

How  far  away  is  this  conclusion  from 
the  theory  acted  upon  by  many  unions! 

How  mistaken  is  the  principle  which 
causes  them  to  hamper  the  individual 
in  his  output! 

How  much  richer  would  all  of  us  be 
by  virtue  of  unchecked  individual  pro- 
duction, paid  for  on  the  piece-work 
system! 

How  beneficent  will  be  the  final 
triumph  of  Co-operation! 

How  fatherly  and  motherly  will  be  the 
future  union  enfolding  together  general 
manager  and  common  labourer ! 

Yet  not  even  then  shall  we  see  equality 
of  compensation,  for  we  shall  never  see 
equality  of  production.  In  such  case, 
equality  would  be  inequitable. 

And  as  to  co-operation — fairly  easy 
when  the  farm  has  been  cleared;  when 
the  ship  has  been  launched;  when  the 
factory  has  been  built  and  the  experi- 
ments paid  for.  But  where  is  the  group 
of  workmen  who  can,  or  will,  "co-oper- 


92  Strikes 

ate/7  in  the  uncertain  stages  of  an  enter- 
prise? How  can  they  be  held  together 
over  the  long  periods  of  preparation,  of 
doubt,  of  struggle,  of  disappointment? 

When,  in  anger,  they  cry  out  against 
the  present  system;  when,  in  their  inex- 
perience, they  vainly  imagine  that  the 
upbuilding  of  enterprises  is  only  sitting 
in  an  office  to  sign  letters  that  somebody 
writes — then  let  them  ask  a  mother  what 
it  is  to  bear  a  child  and  nurture  its  infancy. 
Let  them  propose  "co-operation"  as  to 
its  up-bringing — after  the  age  of  fifteen! 
From  her  they  may  learn  that  the  pain 
and  the  cost  and  the  risk  of  things  is 
borne  when  the  thing  is  young — be  it  boy 
or  business.  From  her  they  may  learn 
wisdom. 

Verily  the  way  is  long,  but  let  it  not  be 
darkened  by  hate. 

Will  it  be  possible,  by  any  means 
whatever,  to  permanently  fix  the  wage- 
scale  as  between  these  two  competitors? 

No;  unless  perhaps  through  the  estab- 
lishment of  a  tyranny,  which  shall  impose 
its  will  upon  both  parties.  If  we  are  to 


Who  Will  Pay  Higher  Wages  ?    93 

be  free  we  must  anticipate  constant 
struggle. 

Perfect  peace  is  had  only  in  a  perfectly 
accepted  slavery. 

Even  the  democratic  tyrant  Socialism 
would  be  unable  to  settle  without  turmoil 
the  disputes  of  interest,  between  classes 
and  between  individuals.  For  the  will 
and  the  power  of  the  Socialistic  state 
are  but  the  resultant  will  and  power  of 
clashing  desires  among  the  people.  Its 
action  must  always  flow  from  compro- 
mise; and  compromise  is  the  fruit  of 
struggle. 

Jones  and  Smith  have  different  capaci- 
ties and  conflicting  desires.  They  are 
not  given  the  wisdom  to  measure  each 
other's  capacity,  nor  the  will  to  yield  to 
each  other's  desires. 

We  dream  vainly  if  we  dream  of  stop- 
ping the  contest  between  them. 

We  work  wisely  if  we  strive  to  make 
this  contest  orderly,  and  to  free  it  from 
bitterness. 


CHAPTER  X 

CONCLUSIONS  AS  TO  STRIKES  FOR  HIGHER 
PAY 

SEVERAL  chapters  have  now  been 
devoted  to  discussion  of  the  strike  for 
higher  pay.  If  our  reasonings  be  correct, 
the  lesson  from  all  this  may  be  put  thus: 

Strikes  for  higher  wages  should  be 
directed  only  against  prosperous  enter- 
prises, but  against  even  these  there 
should  be  moderation;  and  understanding 
should  be  had  of  the  following  facts:  (i) 
There  must  be  failures  where  there  is 
progress.  (2)  Without  occasional  special 
rewards  men  would  not  risk  capital  and 
brains  in  ventures  which  make  progress. 
(3)  Reserves  made  up  from  special 
profits  are  valuable  to  wage-earners  as 
well  as  to  managers.  (4)  The  sacrifice 
of  pay  during  the  strike-period  should 

94 


Strikes  for  Higher  Pay         95 

be  carefully  weighed  against  the  proposed 
increase.  (5)  Against  any  employer  who 
is  having  a  hard  struggle,  no  strike  can 
pay.  (6)  The  strike  is  a  two-edged 
sword.  Every  time  it  swings,  it  clips  a 
feather  (or  a  wing)  from  the  goose  that 
lays  the  golden  egg.  (7)  The  true  title 
of  our  case  is  not  "Labour  versus 
Capital,"  but  "Labour  versus  Labour/* 
It  is  a  family  quarrel.  (8)  Some  in- 
crease of  pay  to  ordinary  wage-earners 
may  come  by  way  of  subtraction  from  the 
pay  of  Directive  Labour,  but  chiefly  such 
increase  must  come  from  increase  of  pro- 
duction. (9)  High  production  comes 
from  high  efficiency  of  both  classes  of 
workers.  (10)  No  permanent  rate  of  pay 
as  between  the  two  classes  can  be  fixed 
in  a  free  competitive  industrial  system. 


CHAPTER  XI 

THE  EIGHT-HOUR  DAY 

THE  strike  for  shorter  hours  is  usually 
made  with  the  condition  that  the  pay 
per  day  shall  remain  the  same.  It  is 
desired  to  receive  the  same  amount  for 
nine  or  eight  hours'  work  as  had  been 
received  before  for  ten  or  nine  hours. 

From  the  workman's  point  of  view 
this  is  almost  a  necessary  condition. 
Except  in  a  few  highly  paid  services,  he 
does  not  receive  enough  to  permit  a 
reduction  without  dropping  below  the 
scale  of  comfort  and  enlightenment  which 
are  necessary  to  make  him  a  good  citizen. 

He  likes  to  believe  that  his  shorter 
hours  of  labour  will  be  so  much  more 
effective  than  a  longer  day  that  the 
employer  need  not  calculate  upon  a  loss 

of  income  should  he  yield  to  the  demand. 
96 


The  Eight-Hour  Day  97 

Undoubtedly  there  has  been  much  truth 
in  such  an  argument  when  applied  to 
reducing  working  hours  from  twelve  or 
fourteen  to  the  lower  average  which  now 
exists. 

Undoubtedly,  many  employers  were 
blind  to  the  facts;  they  often  opposed 
those  reductions  which  changed  a  tired 
animal  into  an  intelligent  workman. 
Nothing  but  good  has  resulted  from  the 
change;  good  to  master  and  to  workman. 

But,  all  this  being  granted,  it  remains 
true  that  somewhere  the  line  must  be 
drawn.  A  man  will  not  produce  as  much 
in  two  hours  per  day  as  in  ten  hours. 
Ten  hours  may  be  longer  than  is  good; 
but  two  hours,  or  three,  or  four,  or  five 
— these  short  working  periods  will  not 
suffice  in  the  present  state  of  the  indus- 
trial arts. 

The  employer  must  calculate  the  values 
at  stake.  An  error  in  this  calculation 
may  mean  ruin.  In  any  particular  case, 
the  values  are  fairly  definite,  from  his 
point  of  view  and  must  be  weighed. 

But  from  the  workman's  point  of  view 


i 


98  Strikes 

it  is  different.  For  who  can  measure 
the  value  in  happiness  of  one  hour's 
leisure  ?  And  who  can  weigh  this  coveted 
hour  against  the  months  of  privations 
that  may  be  required  to  obtain  it?  A 
wife's  welcome,  a  child's  caress — it  is  in 
this  coin  that  the  cost  of  the  sacrifice 
shall  be  repaid. 

If  the  love  of  work  itself  be  destroyed 
by  the  narrow,  impersonal,  uninspiring 
relation  of  modern  machinery  to  the 
artisan's  thought;  if  the  human  bond 
of  companionship  be  destroyed  by  the 
narrow,  impersonal  relation  of  the  master 
with  the  great  working  groups  whom 
he  employs ;  if  work  thus  degenerates  into 
drudgery,  then  this  hour  of  leisure  may 
mean,  not  one  twenty-fourth,  not  one 
twelfth,  of  the  value  of  life,  but  one  third 
or  one  half  of  it — nay,  all  of  the  value 
worth  struggling  for.  If  uncongenial 
labour  fill  ten  hours;  and  dead  sleep  fill 
nine  hours;  and  the  body's  care  fill  one 
hour;  and  the  noisy  shuttle  of  tram-car 
movement  fill  one  hour — then  only  three 
are  left  for  living.  In  this  short  term 


The  Eight-Hour  Day          99 

is  the  soul  of  the  day.  What  shall  it 
avail  the  world  to  gain  a  mountain  of 
merchandise  and  lose  its  soul? 

Here  we  need  no  accuracy  of  compari- 
son for  balancing  of  profit  and  loss.  If 
physical  comfort  can  at  all  be  had  through 
eight  hours*  work  of  the  general  body, 
then  so  let  it  be — that  the  race  may 
live.  The  adjustment  is  difficult.  Com- 
petition makes  it  so.  A  single  employer 
is  almost  helpless  in  the  matter.  He 
may  believe  in  the  righteousness  of  an 
eight-hour  day,  or  even  a  shorter  one; 
he  may  long  to  yield  to  a  demand;  or, 
before  the  demand,  to  voluntarily  give 
increase  of  pay  and  decrease  of  hours. 
But  if  the  factory,  or  the  mine,  or  the 
railway  be  on  the  trembling  edge  of 
bankruptcy;  if  the  manager's  days  are 
spent  in  travail  and  his  nights  in  thought- 
ful vigil;  if  the  pay-roll  be  a  nightmare, 
what  can  he  do  ?  He  is  called  the  master 
of  his  own  business,  but  the  true  master 
is  Competition.  Under  its  compulsion 
vast  efforts  have  been  made;  vast  results 
have  been  obtained,  and  vast  sacrifices 


ioo  Strikes 

have  been  exacted.  To  put  a  limit  upon 
these  sacrifices,  Combination  is  called 
into  the  struggle  against  Competition. 
But  not  until  the  whole  power  of  a 
sovereign  state  enters  into  league  with  a 
Combination,  thus  making  legal  monop- 
oly, is  it  possible  to  find  complete  pro- 
tection from  Competition.  It  is  always 
a  sleeping  peril,  if  not  actually  in  motion 
against  any  particular  enterprise.  No 
matter  how  great  may  be  a  "  Trust/'  it  is 
not  entirely  its  own  master  unless  joined 
directly  to  the  power  of  the  State. 

Both  these  principles  of  action,  Com- 
petition and  Combination,  like  all  other 
laws  which  govern  us,  are  good  when 
kept  within  limits  and  become  bad  only 
when  left  in  exclusive  control  of  our 
actions. 

So  it  is  with  the  law  that  "with  the 
sweat  of  his  brow  shall  he  eat  bread." 
Some  "sweat"  in  every  man's  life  is  a 
blessing.  The  "curse  of  labour"  exists 
only  when  labour  absorbs  all  of  man's 
life. 

Slowly   this    "curse"    is   being   lifted 


The  Eight-Hour  Day         101 

from  the  world — a  rift  in  the  cloud — 
then  darker;  always,  in  the  end,  a  little 
brighter.  While  invention  and  organi- 
sation increase  the  productivity  of  every 
work-hour,  thus  promising  relief,  man's 
growing  desires  call  for  more  and  more 
of  the  things  produced  by  labour  and 
the  work  itself  becomes  more  mechanical, 
less  individual,  more  numbing,  less  in- 
spiring. Yet  withal,  the  gain  has  been 
clear.  The  world's  typical  workers,  the 
humble  day  labourers,  have  shorter  hours 
now  than  ever  before.  This  progress 
should  not  cease  until  eight  hours  (pos- 
sibly, thereafter,  seven)  shall  be,  in  all 
irksome,  indoor,  treadmill,  uninterest- 
ing occupations,  a  maximum  of  regular 
demand. 

To  gain  this,  if  it  can  be  gained  in  no 
other  way,  the  strike  may  well  be  tried. 
No  more  worthy  object  can  be  proposed 
in  answer  to  our  "  Why  to  Strike?" 

The  argument  is  rude.  The  dispute 
hurts  both  parties  to  it;  many  innocent, 
well-wishing  employers,  many  needy 
wage-earners  must  suffer  in  the  struggle. 


102  Strikes 

The  forces  which  are  involved  can  not 
be  confined  to  any  one  industry,  to  any 
one  country,  to  any  one  latitude,  to  any 
one  race.  If  the  object  is  to  be  attained 
without  the  slow,  wearing,  hurting  pro- 
cess of  strikes,  concessions,  arbitrations, 
secessions,  failures,  revivals,  successes,  sac- 
rifices,— then  it  must  be  had  by  virtue  of 
some  World's  Congress  of  Labour. 

Perhaps  the  governments  will  not  be 
first  to  move.  The  subject  is  full  of 
difficulties.  Many  diplomatic  traditions, 
many  consecrated  legal  proverbs,  many 
deep-seated  prejudices  must  be  burned 
in  the  fire  of  reform  ere  the  end  may  be 
thus  gained. 

The  fetich  of  protection  will  muddle 
the  issue;  the  spirit  of  individualism 
will  cry  aloud. 

Yet  it  is  possible  that  this  should  hap- 
pen: in  the  civilised,  industrial  lands, 
men  of  all  classes  may  associate  them- 
selves in  vast  eight-hour  organisations,  no 
other  object  being  sought  or  considered. 

These   may   study   to   determine   the 


The  Eight-Hour  Day         103 

occupations  which  are  to  be  excepted 
from  the  ultimate  general  rule.  Such 
organisations  may  correspond  with  sim- 
ilar bodies  in  various  countries,  look- 
ing to  the  fixing  of  the  terms  in  which 
appropriate  legislation  shall  be  expressed 
and  the  date  when  it  shall  become  effec- 
tive. A  concerted  and  emphatic  ex- 
pression of  their  will  may  thus  be  given 
by  the  European,  American  (and  possibly 
Japanese)  democracies. 

That  will,  duly  registered  by  legisla- 
tures, is  law.  To  it  must  yield  all  pre- 
vious prejudices.  It  may  declare  that 
it  has  weighed  "freedom  of  contract," 
"right  of  man  to  determine  his  own 
labour,"  and  all  other  opposing  forces; 
that  their  value  is  known;  that  a  sacrifice 
of  lesser  things  to  greater  is  to  be  made; 
that  one  more  hour  of  real  liberty  has 
been  decreed  as  more  valuable  than 
twelve  hours  of  freedom  to  sleep  and 
twelve  hours  of  freedom  to  work. 

Then  shall  one  great  issue  die  from 
among  those  that  keep  alive  the  great 
question  "Why  to  Strike?" 


CHAPTER  XII 

GENERAL    IMPROVEMENT    OF    WORKING 
CONDITIONS 

HIGHER  pay  and  shorter  hours  raise 
very  directly  the  question  of  the  cost 
to  the  employer  that  may  result  from 
satisfying  the  demands  of  strikers. 

The  demand  for  more  agreeable  condi- 
tions of  employment  may  or  may  not 
raise  any  question  of  cost.  This  point 
should  always  be  carefully  investigated 
before  striking.  Misunderstanding  in 
respect  to  it  has  often  caused  much 
bitterness. 

The  method  of  doing  a  thing  may  have 
relations  to  the  cost  of  doing  it,  unseen 
to  all  save  those  who  have  planned  the 
business  from  foundation  to  pinnacle.  It 
will  pay  the  employ^  to  investigate  these 

relations  very  closely  and  with  an  open 
104 


General  Improvement        105 

mind,  before  demanding  even  those 
changes  which,  at  first  glance,  seem  ob- 
viously easy  and  of  no  cost. 

Only  those  employers  who  are  very 
shortsighted  and  very  selfish  will  refuse 
to  grant  demands  which  cost  nothing  and 
please  the  workmen.  Only  those  who  are 
harsh  of  nature  will  refuse  to  please  their 
employe's,  even  if  it  should  cost  an  amount 
that  may  reasonably  be  borne.  That 
there  are  such  employers — alas,  is  all  too 
true.  And  many  there  are  who  have 
not  learned,  and  by  virtue  of  the  charac- 
ters born  in  them  will  not  learn,  that  the 
best  strike-preventative  is  kindness. 

When,  in  a  hundred  little  ways,  em- 
ploy6s  see  that  their  happiness  as  human 
beings  is  of  no  concern  to  the  employer,  a 
sensitive  and  exasperated  mood  is  pro- 
duced. This  may  lead  to  contest  over 
some  trifle  which,  under  more  considerate 
management,  would  be  cheerfully  borne. 
It  may  lead  to  a  strike  which  in  itself  can- 
not find  justification  or  wisdom.  Both 
parties  suffer  for  the  selfishness  of  one. 
Thus  it  is  with  all  ugliness  of  nature. 


io6  Strikes 

Until  universal  sweetness  and  light  shall 
be  established  among  men,  it  shall  ever 
be  necessary  to  contend  against  such 
evil.  In  such  case,  the  employ^  may 
choose  submission,  persuasion,  or  a 
strike.  There  can  be  no  specific  rules  for 
the  contests  which  we  must  wage  with 
meanness. 

It  may  be  that  the  strike  will  still  seem 
worth  while  even  if  a  money  value  to  the 
employer  be  found  involved  in  a  demand 
which  at  first  seemed  free  from  any 
relation  to  a  profit  and  loss. 

But  a  knowledge  of  the  real  interests 
at  stake  will  permit  a  wiser  conduct  of  the 
strike  than  would  be  possible  without 
such  knowledge,  and  in  any  case  there 
will  be  less  bitterness  felt  by  employes 
if  they  know  that  a  serious  question  of 
cost  is  involved  in  a  demand  which,  when 
first  considered,  they  supposed  to  involve 
only  some  easy  adjustment  that  could  be 
made  at  no  expense. 

As  in  the  case  of  a  demand  for  shorter 
hours,  so  for  any  other  betterment  of 
working  conditions,  not  expressed  directly 


General  Improvement        107 

in  wages,  the  workman  has  no  definite, 
calculable  problem  set  before  him.  The 
sacrifice  involved  in  making  a  strike 
may  be  definite  enough.  But  it  gives 
only  one  side  of  the  problem.  What  is 
the  value  of  the  thing  demanded?  It 
may  be  the  relief  from  some  outrageous 
condition  which  makes  an  unbearable 
bitterness  of  soul.  It  may  be  the  satis- 
faction of  some  normal  yearnings,  which 
might  indeed  be  suppressed,  but  why  ? 

Such  was  the  case  of  the  telephone 
girls  already  cited.  Who  shall  say  how 
much  it  was  worth  to  look  out  of  a  win- 
dow into  the  living  street?  Whether 
"it  pays"  to  strike  for  these  indefinite 
things,  each  must  decide  for  himself. 
Undoubtedly  some  of  the  best  values 
gained  by  the  unions  are  to  be  found 
in  the  conquest  of  better  conditions  of 
employment. 


CHAPTER  XIII 

THE  SYMPATHETIC  STRIKE 

EVEN  more  vague  than  in  any  other 
case  must  be  the  answer  to  the  ques- 
tion "Does  it  pay?",  when  that  question 
is  asked  concerning  the  "  sympathetic " 
strike. 

It  has  already  been  pointed  out  that 
the  term  "sympathetic"  in  this  usage 
does  not  signify  as  much  of  unselfishness 
as  the  general  meaning  of  the  word 
would  suggest. 

Medical  men  speak  of  "sympathetic" 
pain,  when  it  occurs  in  one  set  of  nerves, 
while  the  original  disturbance  is  found 
only  in  another  set.  There  is,  of  course, 
a  fixed  physical  relation  between  the 
two,  but  the  doctors  can  not  as  yet  trace 
it  in  any  definite  manner. 

The  sympathetic  strike  resembles  the 

108 


The  Sympathetic  Strike       109 

sympathetic  pain.  There  is  a  real  bond 
of  rmitual  interest  between  the  original 
strikers  and  their  sympathisers.  It  is 
not  obvious,  but  it  exists. 

In  the  case  of  any  secondary  trouble 
of  our  nervous  system,  it  is  extremely 
difficult  to  treat  successfully  unless  we 
apply  treatment  to  the  original  distur- 
bance. 

It  is  generally  better  to  put  poultices  or 
hot-water  bags,  or  whatever  expedient, 
upon  the  spot  where  the  real  irritation 
exists.  Of  course,  since  there  is  some 
sort  of  relation  between  any  one  set  of 
nerves  and  any  other  set,  we  may  learn 
how  to  cure  sciatica  of  the  right  leg  by 
treating  the  nerves  of  the  left  arm.  But 
many  a  weary  day  and  month  and  year 
must  pass  before  such  wisdom  shall  come 
to  us. 

We  have  indeed  learned  to  go  as  far 
away  from  the  pain-spot,  in  some  cases, 
as  to  that  particular  ganglion  in  the 
spinal  cord  to  which  the  troubled  nerve 
is  connected.  But  let  it  be  repeated: 
a  counter-irritant  applied  to  the  nervous 


no  Strikes 

system  of  the  left  arm  is  not  likely  to 
cure  sciatica  of  the  right  leg.  That 
treatment  "does  not  pay";  certainly  it 
does  not  usually  pay  the  left  arm,  which 
is  you,  when  you  go  into  a  sympathetic 
strike. 

Many  high  authorities  among  labour 
leaders  could  be  cited  against  the  whole 
"sympathy"  theory  in  labour  troubles. 
As  this  treatise,  however,  is  addressed  to 
the  reason  of  each  reader,  rather  than  to 
his  veneration  for  authority,  we  shall  omit 
the  quotations,  and  leave  you  to  consider 
how  little  you  can  thoroughly  know  of 
the  affairs  of  employe's  in  an  enter- 
prise with  which  you  have  no  direct 
connection. 

How  hard  it  is  to  thoroughly  know  our 
own  business!  How  much  harder  it  is 
to  know  the  other  man's  affairs ! 

Discouragement  to  sympathetic  strikes 
is  expressed  not  only  in  the  words  of 
great  labour  leaders,  but  also  in  the 
statistics  showing  the  number  of  such 
strikes  which  have  failed.  The  very  prac- 
tical lesson  taught  by  these  figures  should 


The  Sympathetic  Strike      in 

be  in  itself  enough  to  largely  eliminate 
such  indirect  efforts  from  the  program 
of  labour  struggles. 

It  is  not  meant  by  all  this  to  deny  that 
a  solidarity  of  interest  can  be  shown  as 
between  one  set  of  employe's  and  another. 
On  the  other  hand  the  mere  existence  and 
continued  activity  of  "Federations  of 
Labour"  demonstrate  that  such  a  bond 
does  exist.  But  there  are  three  serious 
difficulties  attending  every  sympathetic 
strike,  in  spite  of  any  general  "  commu- 
nity of  interest "  which  may  be  shown. 

The  first,  to  which  attention  has  been 
already  called,  is  ignorance  concerning 
the  merits  of  the  original  trouble. 

Second,  miscalculation  as  to  the  pos- 
sible effect  which  your  employer  (you 
being  the  sympathy-striker)  can  have 
on  the  employer  of  the  other  man.  He 
may  be  threatened  with  ruin  by  your 
strike;  he  may  want  to  influence  the 
other  employer  to  yield,  but  he  may  be 
quite  unable  to  do  so.  Your  leader  may 
have  made  a  grave  error  in  judging  the 
relations  between  the  two.  Obviously 


ii2  Strikes 

he  cannot  have  all  the  facts  needed  for 
forming  a  sound  opinion  in  such  a  com- 
plicated question.  How  many  people 
must  suffer  when  he  makes  a  wrong  guess ! 

A  third  and  very  powerful  reason 
running  against  the  sympathetic  strike 
is  found  in  the  fact  that  it  is,  toward 
the  employer,  the  most  un-sympaiketic 
of  all  strikes. 

Think  of  it  a  moment.  Think  of  the 
despair  which  would  seize  you  if  the 
children  whom  you  see  one  day  happy 
around  you,  making  no  complaint,  should 
the  next  day  revile  you,  assail  you,  and 
leave  you. 

And  when  you  ask,  "What  have  I 
done?"  they  answer,  "Nothing  have  we 
against  you,  Father,  but  Mr.  Jones's 
children  declare  that  he  has  not  treated 
them  fairly;  they  are  in  revolt;  there  is  a 
community  of  interest  between  all  child- 
ren as  against  all  fathers.  We  may 
want  help  from  the  Jones  children  some- 
time in  the  future.  The  oldest  Jones 
boy  has  talked  to  our  big  brother,  who 
is  here  to  tell  you  for  himself,  and  they 


The  Sympathetic  Strike       113 

say  if  we  give  you  a  great  deal  of  trouble 
you  will  influence  Mr.  Jones  in  behalf  of 
his  children,  because  you  and  he  live  in 
the  same  block." 

Would  you  not  think  that  your  children 
had  gone  mad  ?  Would  you  not  question 
their  capacity  for  "  self-government "  ? 
Would  you  not  feel  that  the  fairness 
which  you  had  always  tried  to  show 
toward  them  had  been  thrown  away? 
And  would  you  not  feel  some  bitterness, 
some  doubt  as  to  the  possibility  of  ever 
having  harmonious  relations  with  such 
inflammable  material?  And  if  you  re- 
established the  household,  would  it  not 
be  through  an  " armed  peace"  full  of 
suspicion? 

Such  have  been  the  sentiments  created 
in  the  minds  of  many  honourable,  fair- 
minded  employers  by  the  sympathetic 
strike. 

You  may  object  to  the  comparison, 
saying  that  the  relation  between  father 
and  children  is  not  similar  to  that  between 
employer  and  employes.  Nor  is  it  neces- 
sary that  a  close  similarity  in  all  respects 


ii4  Strikes 

should  be  established  in  order  to  draw 
useful  lessons  from  the  comparison  of 
the  two  cases. 

They  are  similar  in  this : — The  employer 
and  the  father  must  both  provide  the 
general  means  of  carrying  on  the  affairs 
of  the  factory  or  the  family;  both  must 
do  the  thinking  required  for  determining 
various  problems  as  they  arise  in  the 
struggle  of  life  maintained  by  the  factory 
or  the  family;  both  have  a  certain  supe- 
riority of  intelligence  over  the  average  of 
those  whom  they  lead. 

But  if  you  reject  this  comparison 
entirely,  think  for  a  moment  how  it  would 
affect  you  if  this  sympathetic  action  were 
reversed.  Suppose  an  employer  calls  to- 
gether his  workmen,  saying  "  I  am  quite 
satisfied  with  your  work;  I  am  quite  will- 
ing and  able  to  pay  the  wages  you  have 
been  receiving,  but  you  are  all  discharged 
this  morning.  Mr.  Jones  is  having  some 
difficulty  with  his  men.  I  have  an  idea 
that  you  can  force  them  to  yield.  Until 
they  do  yield,  I  shall  not  employ  you, 
but  shall  find  others  to  take  your  place." 


The  Sympathetic  Strike       115 

Obviously  this  apparently  unselfish 
sacrifice  of  one  set  of  interests  to  another 
must  generally  lead  to  the  creation  of 
more  trouble  than  it  can  cure. 

And  it  is  tainted  with  hypocrisy — with 
deceit.  Being  generally  unprofitable,  it 
becomes,  through  this  taint  of  hypocrisy, 
more  or  less  immoral. 

In  the  " brave  days  of  old,"  knights- 
errant  wandered  over  Europe  seeking  to 
put  themselves  into  other  people's  quar- 
rels. They  soon  became  a  nuisance,  and 
in  spite  of  the  halo  which  poets  threw 
around  them,  they  were  among  the  first 
of  the  many  fantastic  institutions  of 
their  period  to  be  destroyed  by  the 
awakening  intelligence  of  the  European 
civilisation  to  which  we  belong.  So  let 
it  be  with  the  sympathetic  strike — 
the  false  knight-errantry  of  the  labour 
movement. 


CHAPTER  XIV 

SUMMARY 

WE  may  now  summarise  thus: — The 
strike  for  higher  wages  may  be  calculated, 
as  to  whether  or  not  it  pays,  in  fairly 
definite  terms  of  money  lost  during  the 
strike-period,  and  money  gained  by  the 
increase.  It  pays  sometimes. 

The  strike  for  shorter  hours  cannot 
be  thus  calculated  but  it  often  presents 
a  most  convincing  case  of  the  strike 
that  "  pays  "  in  the  best  sense  of  the  word. 

The  strike  for  better  general  conditions 
of  work  should  be  closely  studied  as  to 
its  possible  effect  on  cost  of  production. 
As  against  selfish  and  short-sighted  em- 
ployers, it  may  pay  well. 

The  sympathetic  strike  does  not  pay. 

It  remains  to  consider  whether  the 
strike  for  recognition  of  the  union  does 
or  does  not  pay. 

116 


Summary  117 

If  the  union  be  worth  a  struggle  and  if 
its  value  cannot  be  secured  in  any  other 
way,  then  a  strike  for  its  recognition  may 
pay.  We  shall  treat  this  subject  in  an- 
other chapter. 

Here  we  shall  only  say  that  many 
strikes  of  this  kind  do  not  pay  because 
they  are  actuated  merely  by  a  too  deli- 
cate sense  of  the  dignity  of  the  union. 
Bloody  wars  between  states  have  been 
similarly  caused. 

Does  it  seem  to  the  militant  workman, 
to  him  who  has  won  and  who  has  lost  in 
the  passionate  struggle  of  " labour,"  that 
these  pages  breathe  discouragement 
rather  than  inspiration  to  those  who  are 
ready  to  sacrifice  the  present  to  a  larger  fu- 
ture ?  Does  the  author  seem,  when  coun- 
selling close  calculation  of  the  debit  and 
credit  of  each  effort,  to  be  unmindful  of 
the  value  of  failures  ?  Does  he  seem  to 
forget  that  a  regiment  must  be  sacrificed 
here,  a  battery  there,  a  squadron  sent  to 
death  on  the  flank,  in  order  that  the  whole 
line  may  advance  ?  Does  he  seem  to  forget 
that  the  losing  strike  sometimes  pays? 


n8  Strikes 

And  the  answer  to  these  queries  is  that 
he  who  has  learned  the  lesson  of  his  own 
life,  he  who  has  read  the  larger  print  of 
History,  must  know  full  well  that  the 
defeat  of  to-day  prepares,  often  enough, 
the  victory  of  to-morrow.  No  planning 
can  be  so  clairvoyant,  no  courage  so 
stubborn  as  to  assure  immediate  success 
to  every  venture. 

The  enthusiasm  to  try,  the  willing- 
ness to  sacrifice,  these  are  more  largely 
supplied  to  every  great  cause  than  the 
wisdom  to  calculate  and  to  conduct  the 
enterprises  that  lead  to  success. 

It  will  always  be  easier  for  a  labour 
leader  to  have  a  thousand  men  follow 
when  he  cries,  "Let  us  strike!"  than  to 
have  half  a  dozen  who  will  carefully  con- 
sider with  him  the  "why"  and  "how" 
to  strike. 

It  is  with  the  hope  of  supplying  counsel 
rather  than  courage,  that  this  work  has 
been  undertaken.  Its  tone  is  fixed,  not 
by  any  lack  of  sympathy  with  failures, 
but  by  a  desire  to  see  strikes  reduced  in 
number  and  increased  in  value. 


CHAPTER  XV 

STRIKES    FOR  THE   UNION — DO  THEY  PAY? 

•» 

No  question  will  be  raised  in  these 
pages  as  to  the  value  of  the  union.  That 
will  be  taken  for  granted.  It  will  be  in- 
structive, however,  to  discuss  some  of 
the  prejudices  against  unionism.  If  it 
should  appear  that  these  may  be  removed 
and  that  by  removing  them  there  would 
remain  practically  no  opposition  to  the 
union,  then  plainly  the  strikes  now  so 
frequently  made  to  enforce  recognition 
would  no  longer  be  in  any  way  suggested. 

And  even  if  these  prejudices  were  not 
removed,  inquiry  should  be  made  as  to 
whether  strikes  for  recognition  are,  in 
fact,  useful  in  strengthening  the  unions. 

Suppose  one  were  in  a  group  of  men 
composed  in  part  of  employers  of  labour ; 

and  in  part  of  professional  men  who  look 
119 


120  Strikes 

at  labour  questions  from  the  outside,  as 
neutrals.  Suppose  the  question  were 
put  to  such  a  group— "Are  you  opposed 
to  labour  unions?" 

The  majority  would  answer,  "  No,  not 
in  principle.  We  know  they  are  useful 
and  will  continue  to  exist;  but — "  and 
then  would  follow  various  statements 
from  which  we  might  make  the  following 
arrangement  of  objections  to  the  princi- 
ples or  practices  of  trades  unions: — (i)  A 
reasonable  fear  that  universal  unionism 
would  create  a  monopoly  in  labour,  exer- 
cised by  a  few  tyrannical  leaders.  (2) 
Radical  disagreement  with  the  union 
principle  (or  frequent  practice)  which 
leads  to  persecution  of  those  wage-earners 
who  desire  to  remain  independent.  (3) 
Radical  disagreement  with  union  princi- 
ple (or  frequent  practice)  which  prevents 
the  clever  employe'  from  doing  more  or 
better  work  than  can  be  accomplished 
by  the  least  competent.  (4)  Radical  dis- 
agreement with  the  union  principle  (or 
frequent  practice)  which  requires  the  pay- 
ment of  equal  wages  to  men  of  unequal 


Strikes  for  the  Union         121 

value.  (5)  Opposition  to  the  intrusion 
between  employers  and  their  employe's  of 
persons  not  directly  concerned  with  the 
business  in  question.  (6)  Radical  disagree- 
ment with  the  union  principle  (or  frequent 
practice)  which  upholds  the  negligent 
or  insubordinate  employe*  simply  because 
he  belongs  to  the  union.  (7)  Condemna- 
tion of  the  fact  that  some  strikes  are 
called  for  furthering  the  personal  ambi- 
tions of  union  officials.  (8)  Condemnation 
of  the  fact  that  some  strikes  are  called  by 
corrupt  leaders  for  the  purpose  of  exact- 
ing blackmail. 

Let  us  suppose  that  a  wage-earner 
joins  the  group  while  these  objections 
are  being  uttered.  He  is  a  man  earning, 
on  an  average,  something  between  two 
dollars  and  six  dollars  per  day,  if  he 
be  an  American;  he  is  a  bricklayer,  a 
telegraph  operator,  a  mechanic,  or 
other  employe*  performing  routine  work 
under  the  direction  of  another;  and 
he  is  a  union  man.  The  employer,  the 
wage-earner,  and  the  other  man  who  is 
neutral  then  begin  a  discussion.  Their 


122  Strikes 

names  are  Smith,  Jones,  and  Thompson, 
respectively. 

Mr.  Smith: — "So,  Mr.  Jones,  you 
want  me  to  discharge  those  of  my  em- 
ploye's who  are  not  members  of  your 
union.  You  may  force  me  to  do  so,  but 
can  you  expect  to  continue  in  friendly 
relations  with  your  employers  while 
demanding  that  they  help  you  to  create 
a  monopoly  of  labour?  Try  to  look  at 
my  side  of  the  question  a  moment.  Sup- 
pose your  union  should  control  all  the 
labour  supply.  Would  it  then  be  possible 
for  me,  as  an  employer,  to  succeed  in 
business  if  one  of  the  principal  articles 
used  by  me,  that  is,  labour,  be  mono- 
polised by  your  union  ? " 

Mr.  Jones: — "It  is  true  we  aim  at  a 
monopoly  of  labour ;  we  want  to  sell  it  for 
as  high  a  price  as  possible.  But  even 
those  railway  companies  having  a  mono- 
poly of  transportation  in  certain  territo- 
ries found  that  reasonable  limits  had  to 
be  recognised  in  fixing  the  price  of  their 
article  of  sale — that  is  transportation. 
They  were  controlled  by  the  principle  of 


Strikes  for  the  Union         123 

the  *  tariff  which  the  traffic  could  stand.' 
In  several  countries  (particularly  in  the 
United  States)  there  was  great  commercial 
development  while  railway  monopolies 
were  controlled  by  no  other  force. 

"  It  is  even  yet  doubtful  in  many  minds 
as  to  whether  the  government  control  of 
rates  has  really  helped  matters,  except  as 
to  inequality  of  rates.  We,  the  wage- 
earners,  shall  find  also  that  you,  the 
employers,  who  control  capital  (which 
we  buy  with  our  labour),  and  who  have 
a  certain  capacity  to  conduct  business 
(which  we  may  not  possess),  cannot  pay 
more  than  a  certain  maximum  rate  of 
wages.  But  we  must  always  be  watch- 
ful and  insistent,  or  we  shall  not  get  that 
maximum  possible  rate." 

Mr.  Smith : — "  And  while  you  are  experi- 
menting with  us,  must  not  many  enter- 
prises fail  because  of  the  mistakes  which 
your  inexperienced  monopoly  will  make? 
Must  we  not  pay  for  your  education  by 
our  ruin?" 

Mr.  Jones: — "Not  necessarily.  Of 
course  some  hardships  must  be  borne  on 


124  Strikes 

both  sides.  But  remember  this — in  gen- 
eral you  can  hold  out  longer  than  we. 
Our  mistakes  will  be  made  in  the  form  of 
unwise  strikes.  Do  we  not  suffer  as 
much  or  more  than  you,  when  we  cease 
purchasing  with  our  labour  the  bread 
which  must  be  had  day  by  day?  Our 
necessities  will  be  our  teacher." 

Mr.  Smith: — "  Yes,  there  is  much  force 
in  that.  But  you  can  carry  on  the  contest 
in  detail,  each  branch  of  industry  or  each 
locality  supporting  the  other  while  you 
force  special  industries  or  special  indi- 
viduals to  ruin." 

Mr.  Jones: — "Again  I  say,  some  hard- 
ships will  certainly  befall  both  sides. 
Let  us  consider,  on  the  other  hand,  an 
example  of  an  almost  complete  monopoly 
of  wage-earners  in  a  particular  industry, 
which  has  not  resulted  badly  for  either 
party.  I  mean  the  Brotherhood  of  Loco- 
motive Engineers  in  the  United  States. 
This  union  has  on  its  rolls  practically  all 
of  the  men  capable  to  run  locomotives  in 
the  United  States.  Their  position,  then, 
is  substantially  that  which  you  so  much 


Strikes  for  the  Union         125 

fear  in  respect  to  other  trades.  If  they 
used  that  position  unwisely  they  could 
for  a  time  disorganise  the  transportation 
of  a  great  country,  but  as  a  matter  of 
fact  they  have  given  less  trouble  to  the 
employing  companies  than  many  of  the 
less  thoroughly  unionised  trades.  Why 
then  should  you  be  so  much  disturbed  by 
the  progress  of  unionism? " 

Mr.  Smith: — "  It  is  true  that  the  union 
of  which  you  speak  has  been  generally 
well  conducted,  but  it  is  not  such  a 
monopoly  as  is  desired  by  many  labour 
leaders.  They  declare  that  all  wage- 
earners  must  be  organised  and  all  trades 
carefully  pruned  of  surplus  members  by  a 
system  of  apprenticeship.  They  wish  to 
destroy  that  body  of  free  labour,  ready, 
in  time,  to  adapt  itself  to  any  trade,  and 
which,  while  it  exists,  tempers  the  tyranny 
of  all  unions.  I  do  not  wish  to  take 
away  from  the  credit  due  the  Brother- 
hood of  Locomotive  Engineers,  but  you 
cannot  be  sure  that  they  would  have 
been  so  wisely  moderate  but  for  the 
knowledge  of  the  fact  that  the  indepen- 


i26  Strikes 

dent  workers  everywhere  would  soon 
furnish  a  new  army  of  men  for  the  locomo- 
tive cab,  if  the  present  "regular  army" 
should  push  its  advantage  too  far.  This 
body  of  free  labour  is  the  balance-wheel 
of  the  whole  labour  movement.  Do  you 
expect  us,  who  so  understand  the  case,  to 
help  you  to  destroy  this  balance-wheel? 
And  again,  do  you  expect  us  to  approve 
the  methods  resorted  to  for  forcing  men 
into  your  unions  ?  Quite  apart  from  any 
interest  in  the  question  as  an  employer,  I 
object  as  a  citizen  to  the  social  pressure, 
sometimes  the  physical  violence,  used 
by  union  men  against  those  independent 
spirits  who  prefer  to  stand  on  their  own 
feet.  They  have  a  right  to  join  your 
union  or  not  to  join  it.  You  try  to  nullify 
that  right.  You  have  even  asked  in 
various  ways  that  only  union  men  should 
have  a  legal  right  to  certain  employments. 
It  was  such  attempted  tyranny  that  was 
in  view  when  I  formulated  the  second 
objection  to  unionism  which  you  heard 
on  coming  in." 

Mr.  Jones: — "You  have  made  me  see 


Strikes  for  the  Union         127 

your  side  of  the  case  better  than  I  did 
before;  yet  we  can  never,  I  fear,  look  at 
the  *  scab '  as  you  do.  To  us  he  seems  to 
be  a  sneak.  We  think  the  unions  have 
helped  to  raise  all  wages — the  scab's  as 
well  as  ours.  He  is  benefited  by  our 
sacrifices. 

"  When  a  country  is  imperilled  by  for- 
eign attack,  he  who  refuses  to  fight  is 
despised  by  all.  The  scab  is  worse  than 
such  a  non-combatant.  By  working  when 
the  union  orders  a  strike,  he  is  actually 
going  over  to  the  enemy.  You  say  he  is 
a  necessary  balance-wheel.  We  think 
he  is  a  chock,  set  in  the  way  of  the  wheel 
of  progress.  We  believe  if  labour  were 
altogether  unionised  that  a  more  just, 
but  not  a  destructive,  division  would  be 
made  of  the  product  of  labour,  capital, 
and  direction.  So  far  as  you  object  to 
using  violence  to  get  rid  of  the  scab,  I 
agree  with  you.  The  cool  heads  among 
us  have  come  to  regret  the  violence  and 
lying  sometimes  used  by  our  brethren. 
We  are  trying  to  eradicate  both.  But  as 
to  using  social  or  business  pressure  to 


128  Strikes 

accomplish  our  aim,  we  shall  continue 
to  do  so." 

Mr.  Smith: — "And  does  it  really  seem 
fair  and  manly  to  you  to  ostracise  the 
wives  and  children  of  men  who  simply 
exercise  the  right  of  independence? 
Does  it  seem  just  to  pursue  such  a  man 
in  his  effort  to  make  a  living? " 

Mr.  Jones: — "  Of  course  the  social  per- 
secution is  open  to  some  question.  It  has 
never  been  ordered  by  the  unions.  It 
cannot  be  stopped  by  them  when  feeling 
runs  high.  Does  it  not  appear  whenever 
men  are  powerfully  and  diversely  moved  ? 
Was  it  absent  from  the  intercourse  of 
Cavalier  and  Roundhead  in  the  *  brave 
days  of  old '  ?  Was  it  unknown  in  France 
even  among  those  who,  before  the  Revo- 
lution, had  a  monopoly  of  '  birth '  ?  Was 
it  never  seen  in  the  American  colonies 
when  Patriot  and  Tory  glared  at  each 
other? 

"  As  to  the  *  business  persecution ', — yes, 
I  think  it  is  fair.  Do  you  not  try  to  take 
away  the  business  of  your  competitors? 
Is  not  this  'persecution'  of  the  small 


Strikes  for  the  Union         129 

concerns  by  the  larger  ones  the  very 
reason  of  the  formation  of  the  so-called 
trusts?  Are  they  not,  in  fact,  capital 
unions,  just  as  ours  are  labour  unions? 
You  use  all  the  brains  and  all  the  influ- 
ence you  possess  to  keep  your  competitor 
from  getting  a  contract  which  you  want. 
You  leave  him  to  look  out  for  himself  as 
to  whether  or  not  the  loss  of  the  contract 
may,  or  may  not,  produce  his  ruin.  Yet 
he  does  you  less  harm  than  the  scab  does 
to  us,  and  he  will  not  be  able  to  benefit 
by  your  success,  as  the  scab  will  benefit 
by  ours,  after  working  against  us." 

Mr.  Smith: — "You  state  your  case 
against  the  free  man  very  well,  but  have 
you  reflected  that  if  you  exterminate  him 
you  will  have  largely  undone  the  work 
of  democracy  in  the  last  hundred  years? 
I  mean  the  work  of  destroying  classes. 
If  all  wage-earners  are  held  to  iron  rule 
in  the  unions,  how  are  men  to  work  up 
from  humble  positions  to  higher  ones? 
Do  you  want  the  employing  class  to  become 
hereditary?  Do  you  want  to  destroy 
the  class  to  which  I  personally  belong — 


130  Strikes 

I  mean  the  class  of  men  who  start  in  life 
as  poor  boys  and  by  various  sacrifices 
and  superior  efforts  rise  from  the  wage- 
earning  to  the  wage-paying  class  ?  Does 
not  the  frequent  rise  of  such  men  prove 
that  no  great  systematic  wrong  exists? 
Do  you  not  know  that  most  of  the  world's 
industrial  progress  has  been  due  to  such 
men?  Do  you  not  see  that  with  all 
this  organisation,  classification,  stratifica- 
tion, ossification  of  men,  the  mainspring 
of  effort  may  be  broken  ?  Are  the  child- 
ren of  all  wrage-earners  to  suckle  the 
milk  of  a  caste?  Are  they  to  be  taught 
that  he  is  a  traitor  to  his  class  who  dares 
to  struggle  harder  than  his  fellows;  that 
he  is  a  traitor  who  gives  to  some  inborn 
superiority  of  brain  its  due  exercise? 
Are  prudence,  thrift,  industry,  and  intel- 
ligence to  be  moulded  in  uniform  tablets 
for  the  uniform  consumption  of  uniform 
men  and  women?  How  are  the  captains 
of  industry  to  be  found  if  they  may  not 
come  up  from  the  ranks?  In  your  haste 
to  put  every  wage-earner  in  a  situation 
from  which  he  cannot  rise  without 


Strikes  for  the  Union         131 

'  treachery '  to  his  family  and  friends,  be 
careful  that  you  do  not  organise  a  society 
of  purely  hereditary  classes,  in  which 
your  children  will  be  permanently  fixed 
at  the  bottom." 

Mr.  Jones: — "We  cannot  afford,  we 
who  are  the  wage-earners  of  to-day,  to 
concern  ourselves  too  much  about  the 
future.  It  is  true  that  our  cast-iron 
rules  require  a  sacrifice  on  the  part  of 
the  more  capable  among  us  in  favour  of 
the  less  capable.  But  the  number  of  the 
former  is  small;  the  number  of  the  latter 
is  great.  Do  not  all  the  great  democratic 
countries  illustrate  this  principle  by  giv- 
ing equal  political  franchise  to  men  of 
unequal  citizenship  value?  You  have 
more  intelligence,  but  not  more  direct 
voting  power,  than  your  bootblack. 
Your  indirect  power  is,  of  course,  greater. 
In  this"  respect  the  parallel  is  not  exact 
between  the  sacrifice  of  political  power 
and  the  sacrifice  of  wage-earning  power, 
but  it  is  an  approximate  parallel.  And, 
moreover,  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that 
a  considerable  number  among  us  is  now 


132  Strikes 

in  favour  of  establishing  the  piece-work 
system  with  a  minimum  wage  for  un- 
skilled labour." 

Mr.  Smith: — "You  mean  the  system 
which  was  forced  upon  the  Australian 
unions  and  which  many  European  and 
American  unions  are  still  resisting?" 

Mr.  Jones: — "Yes,  that  is  what  I 
mean — that  or  a  modification  of  it  by 
which  extra  pay  is  given  for  work  done 
in  excess  of  an  agreed  minimum,  or 
normal,  daily  task.  Concerning  this  we 
are  not  all  agreed.  We  have  our  dif- 
ferences of  opinions,  like  all  other  live 
organisations.  We  learn  from  our  op- 
ponents like  all  other  intelligent  organ- 
isations. We  must  feel  our  way  like  all 
human  organisations. 

"When  I  speak  of  the  piece-work  sys- 
tem as  being  favoured  by  a  considerable 
number  of  workmen,  I  mean  those  who 
are  the  most  liberal  and  enlightened.  I 
mean  those  who  see,  at  least  in  part,  the 
dangers  which  you  set  forth  a  moment 
ago.  With  this  system  we  can  insist 
upon  a  living  wage  for  all  who  are  willing 


Strikes  for  the  Union         133 

to  work,  and,  at  the  same  time,  give  some 
play  to  the  superior  capacities  of  the 
few.  Of  two  brick-layers  one  can  lay 
no  more  than  eight  hundred  bricks  in 
an  eight-hour  day.  He  is  presumably 
doing  his  best.  He  must  be  paid  a  wage 
sufficient  to  give  him  reasonable  comfort. 
Another  can  lay,  and  is  willing  to  lay, 
twelve  hundred  in  an  eight-hour  day. 
Under  the  piece-work  system,  the  second 
man  would  earn  fifty  per  cent,  more  than 
the  first.  If  he  is  willing  to  live  as  eco- 
nomically as  his  less  clever  neighbour  must 
live,  and  if  he  has  the  proper  capacity, 
he  may  pass  into  the  employing  class, 
the  unions  meanwhile  holding  up  the  man 
at  the  bottom  and  also  helping  to  main- 
tain a  good  price  for  each  unit  of  piece- 
work, whether  done  by  a  clever  or  a 
stupid  workman." 

Mr.  Smith: — "Indeed,  if  you,  the 
thoughtful  wage-earners,  can  bring  your 
brethren  to  concede  the  piece-work  sys- 
tem in  all  its  bearings,  you  will  have 
accomplished  a  great  work.  You  will 
have  saved  the  unions  from  the  destruc- 


134  Strikes 

tion  that  awaits  all  who  would  cripple 
the  natural  capacity  of  men  to  produce; 
and  who  would  systematically  deny  the 
due  reward  of  merit.  You  are  evidently 
getting  away  from  the  crude  notion  that 
there  is  a  fixed  amount  of  work  available 
at  any  time,  and  are  reaching  the  sounder 
position  that  a  thousand  bricks  laid  in 
a  useful  building  are  able  to  breed  another 
thousand.  Let  us  hope  that  you  may 
succeed  in  bringing  all  labour  bodies  to 
your  point  of  view.  You  would  thus 
cover  the  fourth  and  fifth  objections 
which  you  heard  me  announce.  They 
are  perhaps  the  most  serious;  but  have 
you  any  really  good  suggestion  to  make 
concerning  the  other  points?" 

Mr.  Thompson: — "  Let  me,  as  a  neutral 
third,  make  answer  for  Mr.  Jones  and 
permit  me  also  to  sum  up  the  discussion 
to  which  I  have  listened.  As  to  your 
last  four  objections  to  the  unions: — 
first,  the  use  of  the  walking  delegate 
or  other  intermediary  agent  between 
employer  and  wage-earners;  second,  the 
upholding  of  unworthy  employe's  if  they 


Strikes  for  the  Union         135 

belong  to  the  union;  third,  the  call- 
ing of  strikes  for  blackmail;  fourth, 
the  calling  of  strikes  to  further  the 
ambitions  of  labour  leaders.  In  the  first 
case  it  seems  to  me  that  you,  Mr.  Smith, 
should  insist  upon  the  right  of  keeping 
walking  delegates  away  from  your  em- 
ploye's during  working  hours,  though  I 
can  easily  understand  conditions  in  which 
their  presence  might  not  be  harmful  to 
you.  On  the  other  hand,  Mr.  Jones 
should  insist  upon  his  right  to  transact 
business  with  you  through  an  agent,  who 
comes  to  your  office  in  the  proper  way 
as  representative  of  your  employe's. 

"  Would  you  refuse  to  transact  business 
with  the  attorney  of  another  manufac- 
turer ?  And  in  the  case  of  your  employe's, 
it  is,  from  their  point  of  view,  more  neces- 
sary to  have  an  independent  representa- 
tive than  is  ordinarily  the  case  as  between 
two  manufacturers. 

"If  your  employes  are  restricted  to 
choosing  a  committee  from  among  them- 
selves, they  may  be  seriously  handicapped 
in  two  ways: — 


136  Strikes 

"  First — such  representatives  may  not 
have  the  requisite  ability  to  set  forth, 
as  against  your  more  highly  trained  mind, 
the  merits  of  their  case. 

"Second — such  a  committee  is  almost 
certain  not  to  have  the  necessary  inde- 
pendence in  their  dealings  with  you. 
Their  judgment  of  the  general  situation 
must  be  clouded  by  their  needs,  or  by 
their  anger.  Is  it  not  better  for  both 
sides  that  the  wage-earners  be  represented 
by  agents,  provided  they  be  well  chosen? 

"Indeed  in  this  matter  of  choosing  good 
leaders  it  seems  to  me  that  we  come  to 
the  most  important  single  point  brought 
out  in  your  discussion.  Thus,  in  respect 
to  Mr.  Smith's  last  three  objections,  they 
practically  fall  to  the  ground  in  case 
labour-leadership  be  wise.  I  think  Mr. 
Jones  must  admit  that  these  last  charges 
are  occasionally  well-founded,  and  yet 
in  doing  so  he  is  only  admitting  that 
the  labour  unions  are  like  other  human 
organisations. 

"Of  course  there  will  be  some  cor- 
ruption. 


Strikes  for  the  Union         137 

"  Of  course  there  will  be  some  sacrifice 
to  personal  ambitions. 

"Of  course  there  will  be  some  support 
of  the  unworthy. 

"  Is  this  not  true  of  the  state  ? 

"  Is  it  not  true  cf  the  Church  ? 

"  Mr.  Smith  must  admit  that  it  is.  He 
may  add  that  the  labour  unions  show 
more  of  these  weaknesses  than  other 
organisations;  and  indeed  that  may  be 
true.  But  it  is  true  of  labour  unions,  as 
of  states,  that  the  general  body  of  mem- 
bers must  suffer  for  mistakes  made  in 
the  selection  of  leaders,  and  that  the 
suffering  slowly  teaches  its  own  cure. 
There  is  no  other  way  open  to  man.  And 
if  Mr.  Jones  will  permit  me  to  preach  a 
little  to  him,  I  shall  ask  him  to  preach 
to  his  fellow-workmen  from  these  two 
texts: — 

"  First — The  strength  of  the  strong  man 
shall  not  be  brought  down  to  the  weak- 
ness of  the  weak  man,  but  it  shall  strive 
with  nature  for  a  reward  that  shall  be 
divided  between  the  labourer  and  all  other 
men  to  whom  the  earth  belongs.  And  the 


138  Strikes 

practice  of  this  text  is  to  be  found  in  the 
piece-work  system  with  all  that  it  implies 
— equal  pay  for  equal  service;  unequal 
pay  for  unequal  service;  due  reward  to 
superiority  of  intelligence,  strength,  in- 
dustry, and  prudence. 

11  Second — Leaders  should  be  well 
chosen,  well  paid,  well  followed,  well 
watched.  Not  character  alone,  not  intelli- 
gence alone,  not  energy  alone  shall  be 
demanded  of  them,  but  character,  in- 
telligence, and  energy  combined. 

"Watch  the  leaders;  watch  them  cease- 
lessly! And  to  you,  Mr.  Smith,  I  need 
say  only  one  thing:  You  must  deal  with 
your  employe's,  to  a  greater  or  less  degree, 
through  their  organisations.  It  is  inevit- 
able. 

"  Perhaps  the  whole  body  of  wage- 
earners  will  never  be  organised.  Perhaps 
the  useful  work  of  the  unions  will  be  ac- 
complished long  before  the  union  move- 
ment can  become  universal.  Meanwhile 
you  will  avoid  much  trouble  if  you  frankly 
'recognise  the  union.' 

11  Afterward  you  may — you  must — con- 


Strikes  for  the  Union         139 

test  many  cf  its  pretensions,  for  are 
not  its  leaders  human  beings,  even  as 
you  are? 

"To  you  both  I  would  say  this:  Be  as 
frank  as  possible  with  each  other. 

"This  does  not  mean,  Mr.  Smith,  that 
you  must  disclose  all  the  secrets  of  your 
business  to  the  union,  for  that  would 
mean  giving  it  to  the  public,  which 
means  in  turn  giving  it  to  your  competi- 
tors. But  go  as  far  as  you  can. 

"  Nor  does  it  mean,  Mr.  Jones,  that  you 
must  inevitably  disclose  the  strength  (or 
weakness)  of  your  organisation,  and  the 
terms  which,  in  the  end,  you  would  be 
willing  to  accept.  Human  nature  seems 
not  yet  ready  for  such  counsels  of  per- 
fection. But,  with  the  usual  reserves  on 
each  side,  you  may  treat  each  other 
honourably  and  good-naturedly.  If  you 
cannot  arbitrate  your  differences,  and  if 
you  cannot  agree  without  a  trial  of 
strength,  then  enter  upon  the  strike, 
shaking  hands  before  and  after. 

"  And  finally,  the  mere  recognition  of 
the  union  may  be  a  legitimate  cause  for 


140  Strikes 

a  strike,  as  against  particularly  stubborn 
employers.  But  wise  management  of 
the  unions  will  make  this  an  almost 
negligible  case.  Strikes  made  for  the 
objects  of  the  union,  when  successfully 
conducted,  will,  in  the  end,  bring  all  the 
'recognition*  required  for  the  good  of 
the  members  of  the  union.  And  in  such 
strikes  you,  the  working  member,  will  be 
less  likely  to  sacrifice  yourself  to  the 
glory  of  your  leaders." 


CHAPTER  XVI 

HOW  TO  STRIKE — VIOLENCE  AND  LYING 

WE  have  shown  that  the  strike  is  moral; 
that  it  should  be  legal;  that  in  certain 
cases  it  is  profitable.  We  have  considered 
the  question  "Why  to  strike?"  What 
can  be  said  in  answer  to  the  question, 
"  How  to  strike?" 

We  have  shown  that  the  organisation 
of  the  labour  union  is  generally  sound; 
that  its  object  is  generally  good.  Shall 
we  conclude  from  this  that  its  methods 
must  always  be  approved?  Certainly 
not. 

It  is  much  easier  to  carry  in  our  hearts 
a  noble  purpose  than  to  find  means  for 
executing  that  purpose.  The  real  rub 
of  life  comes  in  action. 

When  the  conduct    of  a  strike  goes 

no   further  than  merely  to  abstain  from 
141 


142  Strikes 

previous  employment,  no  serious  question 
of  method  arises.  That  is  the  simple 
strike — and  all  that  would  be  covered  by 
our  definition.  We  have  seen  that  even 
though  the  necessary  co-operation  for 
bringing  about  a  strike  may  sail  close, 
in  definition,  to  a  probihited  "combina- 
tion in  restraint  of  trade,"  yet  no  legal 
obstacle  is  likely  to  be  set  up  against 
such  action.  Bitter  contests  have  gener- 
ally arisen,  not  from  the  mere  cessation 
of  work,  but  from  the  things  that  have 
been  done  to  accomplish  objects  which 
the  strike  pure  and  simple  could  not 
accomplish.  Let  us  inquire  as  to  what 
means  have  actually  been  employed  to 
this  end : — 

First — Picketing;  that  is,  endeavouring 
to  turn  away,  by  persuasion,  those  who 
apply  for  the  places  made  vacant  by 
the  strike. 

Second — The  same,  with  accompany- 
ing threats  and  violence  toward  the 
applicants. 

Third — Boycotting;  that  is,  severing 
business  or  social  relations,  or  both,  with 


How  to  Strike  143 

the  boycotted1  person,  and  influencing 
others  to  do  likewise. 

Fourth — Destruction  of  property  be- 
longing to  the  employer  and  his  friends. 

Fifth — Injury  to  the  persons  of  em- 
ployers or  of  fellow-workers  who  refuse 
to  join  in  the  strike. 

Sixth — Injury  to  persons  and  property 
in  general  (riot),  with  a  view  to  forcing 
the  general  public,  or  their  officials,  to 
intervene  for  the  sake  of  peace  in  behalf 
of  the  strikers. 

Of  the  six  items  thus  given,  four 
contain  violence.  We  may  put  these  four 
all  in  the  same  basket,  and  make  a  general 
inquiry  as  to  the  merits  of  violence  in  the 
conduct  of  strikes. 

Shall  employe's  kill  men  and  burn 
houses  in  the  effort  to  obtain  higher  wages 
or  shorter  hours? 

Since  the  reader  of  these  pages  has 
already  discovered  that  the  author  is  not 

1  Captain  Boycott  played  a  disagreeable  role  in 
certain  Irish  land  troubles.  A  conspiracy  was  formed 
against  him.  The  case  became  famous,  and  the  Cap- 
tain's name  was  applied  generally  to  movements  of 
like  character  to  that  which  resulted  in  his  ruin. 


144  Strikes 

a  red  revolutionist,  he  may  feel  sure  that 
the  answer  will  be  "No!"  and  consider 
that  the  question  should  be  at  once  dis- 
missed. It  is  true  that  the  author  can 
not  counsel  violence  in  an  ordinary 
strike  in  a  free  (voting-citizenship)  coun- 
try. But  he  recognises  that  many  of 
his  fellow-citizens  demonstrate  a  contrary 
opinion  by  cracking  the  skulls  of  men 
who  take  their  jobs.  And  it  seems 
worth  while  to  argue  with  such  as  hold 
this  view. 

It  is  the  hope  of  the  author  that  some 
who  have  been  violent  strikers  may  read 
these  words.  It  is  hoped  that  they 
will  thus  change  their  views  and  learn 
to  consider  other  violent  strikers  as  be- 
ing less  wise  than  themselves. 

Of  course  this  recognition  of  misguided 
honesty  is  not  made  for  all  who  break 
the  heads  and  burn  the  houses  of  their 
opponents.  Many  among  the  violent 
are  mere  rowdies  who  rejoice  in  a  row, 
as  most  gentlemen  did  a  few  generations 
ago.  These  may  join  in  the  turmoil, 
having  nothing  at  stake  save  loot  or 


How  to  Strike  145 

excitement.  But  some  of  the  rioters  in 
every  violent  strike  are  men  who  for 
the  most  part  are  quiet  citizens,  working 
industriously  for  the  support  of  "  Molly 
and  the  kids."  When  the  strike  is  over 
they  will  be  back  in  the  mine,  on  the 
trolley-car,  in  the  shop,  on  the  cab,  again 
seriously  and  peacefully  concerned  about 
the  same  woman  and  the  same  children. 
While  he  is  yelling  and  destroying,  one 
is  tempted  to  call  him  a  savage,  a  crimi- 
nal— perhaps  a  murderer.  So  one  might 
call  soldiers — so  they  have  been  called 
by  those  who  suffered  from  them.  Even 
the  dread  authority  of  the  state,  setting 
them  a  duty  to  kill,  cannot  make  of 
them  angels  of  light  in  the  eyes  of  their 
victims.  How  much  the  less  shall  he  be 
forgiven  whose  only  commission  is  his 
anger,  whose  officers  are  the  hot  thoughts 
of  a  mob,  whose  rules  of  war  are  the 
frenzies  of  an  hour ! 

As  soldiers,  we  become  beasts  trained 
by  a  state,  set  upon  its  enemies  to 
destroy  them,  yet  ever  held  in  leash. 
Order  is  not  destroyed.  Indeed  there 


146  Strikes 

is  a  very  maximum  of  order  produced 
for  a  maximum  of  destructive  power 
and  the  mind  rests  on  that,  confident 
that,  when  the  killing  shall  have  gone  far 
enough,  true  social  life  may  be  renewed, 
because  order  was  not  lost. 

As  rioters,  we  become  wild  beasts  let 
loose,  striking  blindly;  destroying  that 
very  Spirit  of  order  which  alone  can 
give  value  to  the  multitudinous  life  of 
civilisation. 

So  we  see  it  who  look  upon  it  from 
the  outside.  He  who  has  been  swept  by 
the  strong  currents  of  hate,  sees  himself 
as  a  soldier  fighting  for  a  Cause.  Sel- 
fish, you  say?  Yes,  his  own  wages  are 
at  stake,  and  he  would  offer  no  apology 
for  some  very  vigorous  effort  made  solely 
in  his  own  behalf.  But  he  feels  also  the 
solidarity  of  his  interest  with  that  of  many 
others.  On  a  larger  scale  we  call  that 
sentiment  patriotism.  Whenever  we  can 
thus  dilute  our  selfishness  with  a  thought 
for  the  welfare  of  others,  we  drink  it  as  a 
sacred  draught,  and  the  acts  of  our  intox- 
ication pass  unimpeached  by  conscience. 


Violence  and  Lying          147 

So  the  striker.  He  has,  as  you  have— 
you  the  employer,  the  man  of  leisure,  the 
big-salaried  employ^ — several  concentric 
zones  of  selfishness.  At  the  very  centre 
he  has  his  mere  personal  existence,  then 
his  family,  then  his  class,  then  his  trade, 
then  his  church,  then  his  country,  then, 
vaguely,  beyond  all,  humanity  itself. 
And  though  the  very  centre  does  not 
change,  these  other  zones  are  not  fixed 
in  their  relations;  they  are  not  perfect 
circles;  they  shift;  they  overlap;  they 
intrude  one  upon  another.  To  the  man's 
central  vision,  one  may  temporarily  ob- 
scure the  other. 

And  he,  the  total  man,  is  made  up  of 
the  resultant  forces  from  all  these  varying 
influences,  unsymmetrical,  struggling.  He 
is  sometimes  all  for  class;  again,  all  for 
family;  again,  all  for  church;  again,  all 
for  country.  If  he  has  great  enlighten- 
ment and  but  little  hunger,  he  will  not  be 
a  violent  striker.  He  will  learn  that 
violence  and  lying  are  the  most  danger- 
ous weapons  against  all  government;  so 
dangerous  that  wisdom  reserves  their 


148  Strikes 

use  as  far  as  possible  to  the  largest 
independent  units — to  the  governments 
themselves:  so  dangerous  that  wisdom 
is  ever  seeking  ways  to  lessen  their  use, 
even  when  thus  limited,  and  the  closer 
association  of  all  states  is  ever  diminish- 
ing their  value  to  the  individual  state. 

Violence  and  lying — these  were  the 
first  and  ready  resort  of  primal  man; 
they  lurk  as  a  disease  in  man  when  or- 
ganised into  social  bodies.  That  which 
may  be  useful  to  the  unit  isolated,  may 
become  harmful  to  that  unit  when 
grouped  with  others,  because  harmful 
also  to  the  group  as  a  whole. 

Perhaps  the  most  practical  argument 
to  urge  upon  you,  the  reader  who  may 
sympathise  with  violence  as  an  aid  to 
strikes,  is  this :  The  only  immediate  reply 
that  society  can  make  to  your  violence 
is,  violence.  If  one  of  the  two  be  not 
promptly  crushed,  you  or  society,  then 
between  the  two  we  shall  kill  the  goose 
that  lays  the  golden  egg  for  all.  Peace- 
ful Commerce  is  that  goose — she  cannot 
live  in  war.  We  may  grumble  about  the 


Violence  and  Lying          149 

distribution  of  the  eggs,  but  let  us  have 
some  eggs  to  distribute!  Then  we  must 
keep  Peaceful  Commerce  alive.  Even 
you,  the  victor,  will  grant  that  the  riot- 
state  cannot  last  long.  It  is  a  means 
toward  an  end,  and  that  end  is  peace, 
with  some  new  distribution.  The  resort 
to  violence  is,  in  fact,  revolution. 

If  a  man  be  intent  upon  destroying  the 
political  organisation  to  which  he  belongs ; 
if  he  has  come  to  believe  this  change  to  be 
of  vital  importance  to  the  happiness  of 
many  people;  if  no  peaceful  effort  can 
effect  the  change;  then  perhaps  his  con- 
science may  be  clear  in  striking  at  existing 
order.  He  may  convince  himself  that  in 
laying  waste  he  but  clears  the  way  for 
reconstruction  of  a  fairer  edifice. 

That  is  not  the  case  of  the  violent 
striker  whom  we  are  considering.  He 
is  not  a  revolutionist.  He  has  no  new 
plan  of  government.  He  would  not 
harm  any  one,  if  only  he  could  promptly 
have  his  wages  raised.  That  is  his  politi- 
cal program — his  revised  charter,  his  new 
Constitution.  He  wants  more  money. 


150  Strikes 

This  he  might  gain  without  violence 
if  he  controlled  all  labour  of  the  kind  in 
question.  He  does  not  control  it;  the 
employer  can  live  without  him.  To 
supplement  his  weakness  as  a  would-be- 
monopolist,  he  attacks  the  man  who 
rightfully  offers  to  fill  the  vacated  job. 
Or  perhaps  he  menaces  the  employer  by 
fire  and  pillage.  The  public  security  is 
threatened,  yet  the  public  is  practically 
helpless  to  raise  his  wages.  Only  the  em- 
ployer can  do  that;  and  perhaps  even  he 
can  do  it  only  in  case  certain  complex 
commercial  conditions  permit. 

The  strike-riot  is  not  a  beginning  of 
political  revolution,  but  of  political  anar- 
chy. You  who  make  this  attack  upon 
the  foundations  of  society  do  not  offer 
to  me,  whose  whole  existence  you  im- 
peril, a  new  political  program  to  which 
I  might  adhere. 

You  do  not  propose  an  object  which 
might  lead  large  numbers  to  fight  with 
you  for  the  establishment  of  a  new 
order  of  government. 

You  are  like  unto  one  who  would  enter 


Violence  and  Lying  151 

the  public  garden  destroying  the  fruit 
which  supports  us,  and  having  no  seed 
which  you  would  plant  in  its  stead. 

Plainly  I  must  resist  you  to  the  ut- 
termost. The  wrong  you  do  in  striking 
at  order  is  universal.  You  yourself  do 
not  escape — yea,  even  if  the  increase  of 
wages  shall  somehow  come  at  the  end. 
All  have  suffered.  The  public  may,  with 
clear  conscience,  suppress  you,  honest 
though  you  be.  Even  when  you  win  you 
are  not  always  helping  yourself.  Your 
indirect  loss,  due  to  the  lowering  of 
state  efficiency,  may  be  greater  than 
your  direct  gain. 

Leave  violence  entirely  out  of  your 
thought,  your  talk,  your  action.  Then 
the  " sympathisers"  will  also  drop  it. 
Resist  them,  these  impossible  sympa- 
thisers, and  they  will  soon  cease  to  bring 
discredit  upon  men  who  do  not  wish  to 
become  bad  citizens  because  they  are 
dissatisfied  with  their  wages. 

Avoid  Violence — that  is  the  first  rule  in 
How  to  Strike.  And  let  Lying  go  with  it. 
They  are  twin  monsters — children  of  War. 


CHAPTER  XVII 

THE  BOYCOTT  AND  THE  PICKET 

IF  then  it  be  true  that  sound  policy 
requires  of  those  who  strike  that  they 
should  turn  aside  from  man's  primitive 
path  of  violence,  let  us  now  consider  the 
peaceful  and  persuasive  aids  to  a  strike 
movement.  These  have  been  given  as 
the  boycott  and  the  picket;  in  the 
present  discussion  they  are  presumed  to 
be  pursued  without  violence  or  lying.  In 
considering  their  legality,  we  study  to 
learn  rather  what  should  be  legal  than 
what  is  legal.  It  has  already  been 
pointed  out  that  nearly  all  questions  are 
found  to  be  tangled  in  a  maze  of  differing 
statutes  if  we  survey  the  whole  legal 
field,  going  from  State  to  State,  from 
country  to  country.  Let  us  then  deter- 
mine what  ought  to  be.  Our  votes  will 

do  the  rest. 

152 


The  Boycott  and  the  Picket    153 

As  in  the  case  of  that  form  of  co- 
operation which  brings  the  union  into 
existence,  or  which  declares  the  strike, 
so  in  these  aids  to  the  strike,  we  are  met 
by  those  ever-present  sprites — "Com- 
bination in  Restraint  of  Trade,"  and 
"  Freedom  of  Contract/'  Again  we  must 
consider  whether  statutes  can  be  (and 
should  be)  framed  to  prohibit  certain 
other  combinations,  and  leave  these  picket 
and  boycott  combinations  untouched. 
Again  we  shall  find  that  the  problem  is 
not  easy :  separation  of  goats  from  sheep 
— anybody  can  do  that;  but  to  separate 
good  sheep  from  bad  ones,  that  is  harder. 

In  this  task  it  must  be  understood  that 
no  rigid  adherence  to  any  stated  principle 
can  be  our  guide.  All  formulas  of  human 
action  fail  in  some  circumstances.  If 
we  cry  "Freedom  of  contract  must  be 
preserved!"  it  is  only  to  discover  that 
every  contract  which  is  permitted  pre- 
vents some  other  contract  from  being 
made.  Every  combination  that  restrains 
the  trade  of  some  is  intended  to  enlarge 
the  trade  of  another.  Every  condemned 


iS4  Strikes 

"combination  in  restraint  of  trade"  is 
itself  born  out  of  the  exercise  of  this 
sacred  "freedom  of  contract."  Where- 
upon the  freely  made  contract  may  be 
declared  null  and  void.  In  a  word  we 
are  free  to  contract  only  for  such  aims 
as  the  law  authorises. 

Is  the  boycott  a  "combination  in 
restraint  of  trade"?  Yes. 

Is  systematic  picketing  the  result  of  a 
"combination  in  restraint  of  trade"? 
Yes. 

Whose  trade  is  "restrained"  by  the 
boycott?  That  of  the  person  who  is 
boycotted. 

Is  anybody's  trade  augmented  by  the 
boycott?  Yes,  that  of  those  who  are  in 
competition  with  the  boycotted  person. 

Is  the  price  of  any  commodity  supposed 
to  be  increased  by  it  ?  Yes,  the  price  of 
the  labour  of  the  strikers  is  usually 
sought  to  be  raised  indirectly. 

Is  the  total  volume  of  trade  directly 
diminished  by  the  boycott  ?  No. 

May  it  be  indirectly  diminished  there- 
by ?  Yes,  an  indiscriminate  and  extreme 


The  Boycott  and  the  Picket   155 

use  of  the  boycott  might  discourage 
seriously  the  spirit  of  trade. 

Is  this  likely  to  occur  in  the  absence  of 
any  legal  enactment  running  against 
the  boycott?  Not  more  likely  to  occur 
than  almost  any  other  excess  growing 
out  of  a  normal  action. 

Are  all  normal  and  now  legalised  ac- 
tions of  such  character  that  they  may 
become  harmful  by  being  carried  to 
excess?  Yes. 

For  example? 

The  right  to  eat  and  drink;  the  right 
to  correct  wives  and  children;  the  right 
to  converse. 

What  is  the  spirit  of  competition?  The 
desire  to  get  ahead  of  another — to  injure 
the  trade  of  another  for  one's  own  benefit. 

Is  this  supposed  to  be  helpful  within 
limits  and  harmful  when  extraordinary 
success  has  been  achieved?  Yes. 

What  is  the  spirit  of  combination? 
It  is  generally  to  enlarge  and  strengthen 
the  unit  which  competes. 

What  are  the  largest  competing  units? 
The  nations  of  the  earth. 


156  Strikes 

Is  competition  lessening  within  the 
nations?  Yes,  in  the  sense  that  many 
individuals,  through  combination,  cease 
to  compete  with  each  other  as  individuals ; 
and  further,  that  some  competing  com- 
binations have  in  certain  countries  prac- 
tically driven  all  others  from  the  field, 
for  a  time  at  least.  No,  in  the  sense 
that  such  big  combinations  generally 
continue  the  fight  among  themselves. 

What,  essentially,  is  this  fight  that 
goes  on  in  business  ? 

It  is  a  struggle  to  increase  the  price 
and  volume  sold  of  my  goods  and  to 
decrease  the  price  and  volume  sold  of 
your  goods. 

Is  this  true  of  the  labour  struggles 
between  employer  and  employe's?  Yes, 
labour  is  sold,  and  food,  clothing,  lodging, 
etc.,  are  bought  by  employe's. 

What  classes  of  weapons  are  barred  by 
the  State  to  competitors  entering  the 
commercial  tournament?  They  are  vio- 
lence and  lying. 

Are  all  others  admitted?  In  general 
terms,  yes.  In  special  cases,  no.  But 


The  Boycott  and  the  Picket    157 

each  special  case  existing  should  be 
challenged. 

May  not  the  boycott  and  picketing 
be  conducted  without  resort  to  violence 
or  lying?  Yes. 

If  a  boycott  should  bring  a  successful 
issue  to  a  strike,  thus  benefiting  thou- 
sands of  wage-earners,  and  should  not 
permanently  injure  the  boycotted  busi- 
ness, might  it  not,  in  such  case,  be 
properly  called  a  "combination  in  en- 
largement of  trade,"  quite  as  reasonably 
as  a  "  combination  in  restraint  of  trade"? 

Certainly. 

In  what  manner  would  it  enlarge  trade  ? 

The  uplifting  of  wage-earners  to  com- 
fort and  education  has  always  been 
accompanied  by  an  increase  of  general 
trade  and  prosperity. 

Can  a  more  familiar  instance  be  given 
in  which  a  combination,  technically  one 
in  "restraint"  of  trade,  becomes  in  fact 
a  combination  in ' 'enlargement"  of  trade? 

Yes.  In  the  case  of  two  railways  con- 
necting the  same  terminals  with  substan- 
tially equal  facilities.  Their  rates  must 


158  Strikes 

be  the  same — or  they  must  be  different. 
If  different,  one  must  be  higher  than 
the  other.  The  advantage  being  public 
and  obvious,  it  follows  that  all  traffic 
between  terminals  will  go  by  the  lower 
rate.  Should  this  traffic  be  very  large 
in  proportion  to  local  traffic,  the  railway 
which  maintains  the  higher  rate  will  be 
ruined.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  their 
charges  be  equalised  through  combina- 
tion, both  may  obtain  reasonable  support, 
and  by  continuing  service,  increase  the 
trade  of  the  region  through  which  they 
run.  And  it  must  be  remembered  that 
rates  cannot  be  equalised  except  through 
combination,  formal  or  informal. 

Is  this  illustration  valid  for  many 
other  cases  ? 

It  is  valid  for  many  in  which  a  product 
is  offered  to  public  consumption  in  a 
limited  market,  the  price-advantage  be- 
ing equally  available  to  all  purchasers. 

What  is  the  object  of  citing  these 
cases  ? 

To  show  that  the  formula  "combina- 
tion in  restraint  of  trade"  is  too  vague 


The  Boycott  and  the  Picket    159 

and  misleading  to  find  a  proper  place  in 
the  vital  legislation  of  any  country. 

And  in  cases  such  as  that  here  con- 
sidered, the  "law,"  instead  of  being  the 
clearly  expressed  will  of  representative  leg- 
islators, must  often  flow  from  the  opinion 
of  one  or  more  judges  whose  duty  requires 
that  a  definite  meaning  shall  be  given  to 
indefinite  language.  Or  they  must,  when 
the  law  is  clear,  sometimes  refrain  from 
applying  the  strict  letter  of  a  prohibition 
to  customs  which  common-sense  recog- 
nises as  necessary  to  the  public  welfare. 

Just  so  long  as  men  try  to  legislate 
against  bad(?)  combinations,  just  so  long 
will  they  be  forced  to  use  language 
which  will,  when  strictly  interpreted, 
include  good  (?)  combinations. 

The  courts  must,  then,  legislate,  in  two 
cases — that  of  a  very  vague  statute,  and 
that  of  an  impossible  statute.  They  will 
usually  act  in  rough  conformity  with  the 
educated  opinion  of  their  surroundings. 

You  can  share  in  this  judicial  legisla- 
tion by  helping  to  form  the  educated 
opinion  of  your  country. 


160  Strikes 

The  catechism  above  recited  may  be 
taken  as  indicating  that  no  clear  and 
positive  proof  can  be  set  up  against  the 
wisdom  of  legalising  the  boycott.  We 
shall  now  state  a  substantial  reason  in 
favour  of  legalising  it. 

Equality  before  the  law  is  a  more  impor- 
tant principle  to  be  preserved  among 
citizens  than  that  which  is  formulated  in 
any  particular  law. 

In  respect  to  this  matter  of  boycotting, 
the  powerful  few  enjoy  a  privilege  which 
is  attempted  to  be  denied  to  the  many 
weak  ones. 

Half  a  dozen  great  financiers,  yes,  half 
of  half  a  dozen,  may  effect  a  more  disas- 
trous boycott  against  some  doomed  man 
or  men,  than  can  be  brought  about  by  the 
combined  efforts  of  half  a  dozen  thou- 
sand workmen. 

This  can  be  done,  and  it  is  done,  and  it 
will  be  done.  Sometimes  it  ought  to  be 
done. 

When  only  a  few  individuals  are  con- 
cerned in  the  plot,  when  it  is  laid  with 
the  cigars  and  coffee  after  lunch,  it  seems 


The  Boycott  and  the  Picket    161 

only  a  normal  "agreement  among  gentle- 
men." It  is  accomplished  without  or- 
ganisation and  without  record.  It  may 
easily  escape  the  eye  of  the  law;  yet  it 
may  be  a  full-fledged  boycott. 

Its  morality  will  be  judged  differently 
by  various  critics,  all  being  honest. 

The  limit  of  its  intended  action,  among 
financiers,  may  be  the  very  ruin  of  the 
victim,  not  the  mere  yielding  on  his  part 
of  some  contention  urged  against  him. 

Such  is  rarely  the  case  among  working 
men.  They  are  generally  satisfied  with 
a  gaining  of  the  original  point  of  dispute. 
But  in  order  to  accomplish  their  aim 
they  must  organise.  They  must  appeal 
to  thousands  of  their  own  class,  since  the 
power  of  each  standing  alone  is  so  small 
as  to  be  ineffective  for  injury.  They 
must  use  the  printing-press — that  action 
is  necessarily  public.  It  falls  easily  under 
the  observation  of  antagonists ;  and  before 
the  courts  is  easily  proved  to  lie  within 
the  legal  definitions  of  "combination"  or 
of  "conspiracy. " 

In   both   cases,    namely   that   of   the 


1 62  Strikes 

boycott  by  three  and  the  boycott  by  three 
thousand,  their  moral  attitude  toward 
the  adversary  is  the  same.  An  injury 
is  desired  to  be  inflicted  for  a  supposed 
benefit  to  the  boycotters,  or  for  revenge. 
And  the  mode  of  attack  is  essentially  the 
same. 

All  the  commercial  and  social  force 
available  to  the  three,  or  the  three 
thousand,  may  be  directed  against  the 
adversary.  Violence  and  lying  excluded, 
these  forces  are  of  such  nature  that 
their  legality  is  never  questioned  when 
exercised  by  a  single  individual  in  his 
own  behalf.  In  the  more  or  less  secret 
and  complicated  program  of  the  three, 
violence  will  rarely  appear,  though  lying 
may  play  a  great  part.  In  the  more 
or  less  public  and  simple  program  of 
the  three  thousand,  violence  will  gener- 
ally be  more  prominent  than  lying. 

Both  parties  tend  to  use,  and  largely 
do  use,  all  means  that  would  be  legal  if 
exercised  by  an  individual,  though  per- 
haps now  technically  illegal  when  used 
by  several  individuals  in  combination. 


The  Boycott  and  the  Picket    163 

The  statutes  of  Great  Britain  have 
finally  recognised  and  legalised  this  tend- 
ency. It  was  enacted  in  1906,  that  in  a 
trade  dispute  several  persons  in  combina- 
tion may  legally  do  that  which  would  be 
legal  if  done  by  an  individual  acting  alone. 
Thus  the  boycott  without  violence  or 
fraud  stands  firmly  based  in  English 
law — unless  judicial  interpretation  shall 
nullify  common  use  of  words. 

It  is  to  be  regretted  that  the  word  boy- 
cott, which  was  born  in  violence  and  to 
most  minds  still  suggests  violence,  should 
be  applied  to  an  act  of  peaceful  commer- 
cial competition.  True,  the  act  is  a  harsh 
one.  So  is  its  complementary  act,  black- 
listing. Here  are  two  ugly  names,  covering 
two  harsh  acts — or  rather  the  same  act 
usually  performed  in  one  case  to  injure  a 
trader  or  employer;  in  the  other  to  injure 
a  working  man.  Both  are  animated  by  be- 
lief that  the  injury  done  to  one  will  result 
in  good  done  to  another,  or  others.  They 
stand  or  fall  together — in  logic.  They 
are,  in  fact,  interchangeable  words. 
Neither  one  of  them  appears  in  the 


164  Strikes 

British  statute  above  referred  to.  Text- 
ually  it  runs  as  follows  "An  act  done 
in  pursuance  of  an  agreement  or  com- 
bination by  two  or  more  persons,  shall, 
if  done  in  contemplation  or  furtherance 
of  a  trade  dispute,  not  be  actionable 
unless  the  act,  if  done  without  any  such 
agreement  or  combination,  would  be 
actionable." 

He  who  proposes  a  new  word,  or  an  old 
word  for  a  new  and  specific  use,  is  essay- 
ing that  which  is  beyond  the  power  of 
kings  to  perform. 

Nevertheless,  we  may  try — any  of  us — 
where  Alexander,  Caesar  and  Napoleon 
failed.  Suppose  the  acts  now  best  de- 
scribed by  "  boycott  without  fraud  or  vio- 
lence," and  the  acts  now  best  described 
by  "blacklist  without  fraud  or  violence," 
be  henceforth  known  as  "refusals." 

We  may  combine  to  organise  a  "re- 
fusal" against  Smith  whose  hats  we  de- 
termine not  to  buy.  We  may  put  Jones 
on  the  "refusal"  list,  because  for  vari- 
ous reasons  we  think  he  should  not  be 
employed  by  ourselves  or  others  in  our 


The  Boycott  and  the  Picket    165 

line  of  business — that  is  we  have  deter- 
mined not  to  buy  his  labour.  The  hats 
of  one,  the  labour  of  the  other  are  " re- 
fused," not  boycotted  or  blacklisted, 
by  ourselves  and  those  who  stand  with 
us  in  the  "furtherance  of  a  trade 
dispute." 

Such  a  word  thus  substituted  might 
lay  the  ghost  of  Captain  Boycott  whose 
Irish  neighbours  forced  fame  and  in- 
famy upon  him.  Their  fevered  minds 
made  war  for  an  immediate  and  spe- 
cial relief  from  hardship.  A  local  rent- 
quarrel  gave  to  the  English  language 
a  new  word  in  which  the  ideas  of  "  re- 
fusal" and  of  "  violence"  were  unfortu- 
nately welded  together.  It  is  worth 
while  to  sue  for  a  divorce  in  such  case. 
One  idea,  that  of  "refusal,"  must  survive 
as  long  as  we  have  the  competitive  sys- 
tem as  basis  for  our  industrial  life.  The 
other,  that  of  "violence,"  specifies  a 
lurking  disease  which  society  constantly 
endeavors  to  abate. 

Let  us  now  return  to  a  discussion  of  the 
relation  between  the  boycott,  or  "  refusal ' ' 


1 66  Strikes 

by  three,  and  the  same  thing  by  three 
thousand. 

In  both  cases  the  organisers  may  be 
tempted  to  use  such  illegal  methods  as 
are  best  suited  to  their  organisation; 
violence  in  the  one  case,  lying  in  the 
other,  occasionally  both.  Essentially,  the 
morality  of  aim  and  of  method  are  closely 
similar,  yet  one  will  easily  escape  the 
meshes  of  law;  the  ether  will  easily  be 
caught  therein.  And  this  is  not  "  equal- 
ity before  the  law." 

Will  you  say  that,  since  the  letter  of 
the  law  (in  America)  would  condemn 
a  "  refusal,"  whether  by  three  or  by  three 
thousand,  that  equality  does  exist? 

And  the  answer  is:  of  what  value  is 
this  theoretical  equality  if,  in  practice, 
certain  activities  be  permitted  to  one 
class  of  men,  while  to  another  class  these 
activities  are  denied  ? 

Are  not  these  activities  used  for  the 
advantage  of  those  who  use  them? 

Is  not  the  actual  ability  to  use  activities 
the  real  test  of  equality  before  the  law? 

If  this  special  privilege  were  used  by 


The  Boycott  and  the  Picket    167 

the  employing  class  only  in  contests 
among  themselves,  tearing  down  or  build- 
ing up  one  as  against  another,  then 
might  we  pass  by  this  point  of  difference 
in  status.  But  as  a  matter  of  fact,  the 
refusal  by  three  may  be  used,  and  is 
used,  and  will  be  used,  through  the 
blacklist  and  the  lockout,  against  the 
three  thousand.  Then  let  the  contest 
be  waged  with  equal  arms. 

So  far  as  the  proscribed  weapons  are 
concerned — violence  and  lying — it  will 
be  easier  for  society  to  suppress  the  former 
than  the  latter;  and  in  so  far  as  lying 
cannot  be  suppressed,  if  there  be  advan- 
tage, it  will  remain  with  the  three,  rather 
than  with  the  three  thousand. 

Leaving  the  state  to  continue  its 
world-old  contest  with  these  two  foes, 
let  us  put  before  our  minds,  in  familiar 
phrase,  just  what  we  mean  by  "refusal," 
that  is  the  boycott  shorn  of  violence  and 
lying:— 

Jones  and  Brown  go  to  Thompson  and 
say: — "  We  have  a  dispute  with  Johnson 
as  to  the  price  of  our  goods.  He  is  in  the 


1 68  Strikes 

position  of  a  privileged  buyer  of  our 
merchandise, — our  transportation  or  our 
labour"  (or  whatever  else  it  may  be). 
"  In  order  to  put  pressure  upon  Johnson 
we  have  decided  to  ask  all  our  friends  to 
withdraw  their  patronage,  as  purchasers 
of  his  goods;  and  further,  we  shall  re- 
strict all  our  business  dealings,  as  far  as 
possible,  to  those  who  will  aid  us  in 
carrying  our  point.  We  therefore  want 
you  to  know  that  you  must  choose,  in 
your  own  business,  to  ally  yourself  with 
us  and  our  friends  or  with  Johnson  and 
his  friends. 

"  We  are  sorry  if  this  decision  should  be 
attended  with  any  temporary  loss  to  you, 
but  the  purchasing  power  of  ourselves 
and  our  friends  is  the  only  leverage  we 
can  use  in  this  matter. 

"  We  are  free  to  dispose  of  it  where  our 
interests  lie.  You  will  decide  according 
to  your  own  interest." 

There  is  the  "refusal." 

When  Jones  does  it  alone,  it  passes 
without  challenge.  It  seems  to  be  the 
exercise  of  the  most  ordinary  freedom. 


The  Boycott  and  the  Picket   169 

When  powerful  Jones  combines  with 
powerful  Brown  and  a  few  others  having 
common  interests,  statutes  may  be  found 
to  run  against  such  action;  but  these 
statutes  are  substantially  dead  letters, 
falling  in  the  ambush  of  coffee  and 
cigars. 

When  weak  Jones  combines  with  a 
thousand  others,  using  the  printing-press 
to  address  a  thousand  Thompsons,  then 
the  big  public  act  challenges  attention; 
then  may  the  statute  if  it  exists  be 
easily  applied.  But  should  it  be  applied? 
Should  there  be  such  a  statute?  Has 
the  British  Parliament  been  wise  or 
foolish  in  its  enactment  of  1906?  Let 
all  citizens  think  it  over.  Shall  we  not 
be  content  to  stamp  out  fraud  and  vio- 
lence, leaving  to  Jones  the  Many  such 
activities  as  will  certainly  be  enjoyed  by 
Jones  the  Few? 

Are  we  so  sure  that  the  use  of  all  his 
commercial  influence  by  Jones  the  Many 
will  be  harmful  to  the  state  that  we 
should  deny  him  at  least  a  trial  of  the 
system  he  demands?  If  his  course, 


1 70  Strikes 

when  unrestricted,  becomes  in  fact  gen- 
erally injurious,  will  he  not  suffer  in  that 
general  injury? 

Will  he  not  aid  in  correcting  an  evil 
when  the  evil  shall  have  grown  as  big,  as 
obvious,  as  his  critics  declare  it  will 
be? 

Let  us  follow,  for  a  time  at  least,  the 
example  set  by  British  law.  Let  us  give 
practical  as  well  as  theoretical  equality  in 
fighting  methods  to  Jones  the  Many  and 
to  Jones  the  Few. 

It  will  not  be  necessary  to  argue 
separately  the  case  for  establishing  the 
reasonable  right  of  strikers  to  use  the 
system  of  picketing,  without  violence. 
Although  probably  a  "  combination  in 
restraint  of  trade,'*  although  probably  a 
"  conspiracy"  under  strict  construction  of 
certain  statutes,  it  has  thus  far  been  more 
leniently  dealt  with  by  the  courts  than 
the  system  of  boycotting.  When  the 
doors  have  been  opened  wide  enough  to 
permit  the  latter  to  pass  into  undisputed 


The  Boycott  and  the  Picket    1 7 1 

territory  of  right,  the  former  will  have 
no  difficulty  in  following. 

The  statute  above  quoted  will  certainly 
legalise  the  peaceful  picket.  Probably  all 
who  would  approve  the  "refusal,"  would 
also  approve  the  picket.  The  legal  right  to 
this  form  of  strike-aid  should  everywhere 
be  established.  When  employed  fairly, 
decently,  good-humouredly,  it  should  give 
good  results .  It  will  naturally  be  tried  at  an 
earlier  stage  of  contest  than  the  "  refusal" ; 
it  may  win  the  strike  without  other  aid. 

We  may  now  review  the  argument. 
It  has  been  shown: 

(A)  That  the  strike  is  moral;  is  or  ought 

to  be  legal;  may  be  profitable. 

(B)  That    arbitration    cannot    be    con- 

sidered as  an  universal  cure  for 
labour  troubles;  but  that,  when 
offered,  it  should  generally  be  ac- 
cepted by  workmen. 

(C)  That  any  desire,  not  illegal  or  im- 

moral, may  rightfully  be  given  as 
an  answer  to  the  question — "Why 
to  strike?" 


172  Strikes 

(D)  That  the  cases  in  which  the  strike 

may  pay  are,  chiefly :  (a)  for  higher 
wages ;  (b)  for  shorter  hours ;  (c)  for 
better  general  conditions;  (d)  for 
recognition  of  the  union  (rarely) . 

(E)  That  the    sympathetic    strike    does 

not  pay. 

(F)  That  the  piece-work  system,  liberally 

applied,  will  go  far  toward  solving 
labour  questions;  but  that  perfect 
peace  means  no  progress. 

(G)  That  the  competition  in  which  Or- 

dinary Labour  is  engaged  is  with 
Directive  Labour,  rather  than  with 
Capital. 

(H)  That  efficiency  of  workmen  largely 
supplies  the  fund  from  which  higher 
pay  must  be  drawn. 

(I)  That,  except  for  self-defence,  vio- 
lence and  lying  are  to  be  excluded 
from  all  programs  of  private  ac- 
tion. 

(J)  That  the  laws  of  the  land  are  first 
to  be  obeyed,  then,  if  objection- 
able, changed  through  peaceful 
political  action. 


The  Boycott  and  the  Picket   173 

(K)  That  the  boycott,  or  refusal,  and  the 
picket  are,  or  ought  to  be,  legal, 
and  may  righteously  enter  into  the 
program  of  "How  to  strike?" 


CHAPTER  XVIII 

OBLIGATION  OF  LEADERS 

THESE  pages  have  upheld  the  strike, 
the  union,  the  boycott  (without  violence 
or  lying),  and  the  picket  (without  vio- 
lence or  lying).  The  unwisdom  of  vio- 
lence and  lying  on  the  part  of  any  citi- 
zen has  been  shown.  But  it  remains  to 
point  out  a  special  responsibility  on  the 
part  of  labour  leaders;  and  to  allege  a 
shirking  of  this  responsibility  by  many 
such  leaders. 

Obligation  is  the  other  side  of  Right, 
and  Right  becomes  Wrong  when  freed 
from  Obligation. 

The  right  of  a  father  to  correct  his  child 
stands  with  his  obligation  to  protect  and 
support  it.  The  right  of  men  to  vote 
stands  with  the  obligation  not  to  sell  the 
vote.  The  right  to  hold  property  stands 
174 


Obligation  of  Leaders         175 

with  the  obligation  to  prevent  nuisances, 
to  pay  taxes  and  debts.  A  further  obli- 
gation to  use  property  for  the  public 
good  is  rapidly  forming.  Sovereigns 
have  rights  of  rule  and  obligation  of 
justice.  Tyrants,  for  a  little  while,  enjoy 
right  without  obligation,  then  they  fall. 

Men  first  grasp  Power,  enforce  Rights, 
and  may  then  bitterly  learn  that  neg- 
lected Obligation  rises  to  punish  their 
forgetfulness. 

So  it  has  been  with  many  labour 
unions.  Leaders  have  combined  the 
Many  into  One.  With  the  Power  thus 
gained,  they  have  secured  the  Right  to 
direct  the  Many  as  units  of  production. 
They  enjoy  these  rights  of  direction  by 
virtue  of  the  general  calm  and  cohesion  of 
society. 

The  spoken  word  of  the  state — the  Law 
— protects  them  in  a  thousand  activities. 
Some  of  these  activities  are  perilous  to 
peace.  Yet  the  state  does  not  forbid. 

It  sees  its  citizens  swear  a  new  alle- 
giance. It  does  not  forbid,  because  it  is 
a  minor  allegiance. 


1 76  Strikes 

It  sees  its  citizens  directed  in  their  most 
serious  relations  by  union  leaders.  It 
does  not  forbid,  while  the  directed  acts 
are  yet  legal. 

But  the  state  does  forbid  Violence.  It 
forbids  destruction  of  that  which  it  was 
born  to  protect. 

The  rights  which  have  been  granted, 
by  statute  or  prescription,  to  the  unions, 
are  in  general  the  right  to  urge  the  citi- 
zen to  certain  lawful  acts  directed  against 
his  employer,  and  to  perform  those  acts 
by  co-operation.  These  rights  are,  in 
practice,  directed  by  the  union  leaders. 
Indeed,  we  may  say  that  the  leader  is  the 
organ  of  the  many  for  the  enjoyment 
of  rights  of  action.  He  who  enjoys  this 
right,  while  neglecting  the  corresponding 
obligation  to  restrain  his  followers  (as 
best  he  can)  from  unlawful  acts,  is  dis- 
loyal to  his  trust,  and  an  enemy  to  the 
state. 

Can  it  be  doubted  that  many  union 
leaders  have  been  guilty  of  such  disloy- 
alty? 

Can  their  denial  of  responsibility  for 


Obligation  of  Leaders         177 

violence  be  taken  as  anything  but  a 
flouting  of  the  law-abiding  members  of 
the  union? 

How  long  would  union  men  be  burning 
and  killing  if  they  knew  that  their  leaders 
would,  as  far  as  possible,  punish  such 
conduct  ? 

'  Have  those  who  burn  and  kill  and 
pillage  been  expelled  from  the  unions  ? 

Vain  and  cruel  is  leadership  which 
permits  excited  men  .and  women  to 
wrong  themselves  and  the  state,  unre- 
strained even  by  the  fear  of  losing  mem- 
bership in  that  union  which  set  their 
strike  in  motion! 

The  wrong  to  themselves  flows  out  of 
the  wrong  done  to  Society — for  Society 
must  treat  Violence  as  its  enemy,  save 
only  when  Violence  is  its  slave. 

When  strikers  break  the  bonds  of  law, 
they  change  a  commercial  dispute  into 
a  sort  of  civil  war. 

To  abate  such  disorder  is  the  leader's 
obligation. 

And  there  must  be  a  certain  hostility 
toward  the  whole  union  movement  as 


178  Strikes 

long  as  men  suspect  that  the  passions 
of  strikers  are  not  generally  restrained 
by  their  leaders. 

This  hostility  must  be  felt  even  by  those 
whose  sympathies  run  strongly  toward 
the  true  objects  of  union  activities.  For 
is  not  violence  a  threat  against  all  of  us? 
Is  not  he  who  breaks  the  head  of  Jones 
and  burns  his  house  (defying  Law)  an 
enemy  also  of  Smith?  When  the  Law  is 
wounded  all  men  bleed. 

But,  it  may  be  asked,  why  is  this 
adjuration  directed  against  the  leaders? 
Why  are  they  held  to  a  special  responsi- 
bility and  smirched  in  a  special  blame? 
Are  not  they  generally  innocent  of  any 
overt  physical  act  of  violence  ? 

Why  should  not  the  sermon  of  peace  be 
preached  only  to  the  men  who  actually 
hold  the  bludgeon  and  apply  the  torch? 
And,  indeed,  the  sermon  is  to  them. 

Yet  it  is  known  that  the  many  are 
wayward;  that  the  unaccustomed  leisure 
of  a  strike  may  beget  mischief. 

The  soldiers  of  a  patriot  army  may 
become  marauders  of  the  most  vulgar 


Obligation  of  Leaders         179 

type  if  discipline  be  relaxed  during  days 
of  easy  march  or  of  idle  encampment. 

It  is  known  that  the  froward  dema- 
gogue will  sieze  the  moment  of  sullen 
idleness  to  inflame  restless  minds. 

True  leadership  seeks  to  check  the 
waywardness  of  the  unthinking  and  to 
defeat  the  schemes  of  the  cunning  dema- 
gogue. 

True  leadership  knows  that  at  times  it 
must  oppose  the  passions  of  its  followers, 
and  be  ready  to  sacrifice  popularity  of 
the  present  to  prosperity  of  the  future. 

To  make  such  opposition  to  endure  such 
sacrifice,  is  the  obligation  of  leadership. 

It  is  often  the  only  business  of  leader- 
ship— for  why  need  we  a  chief  if  our  own 
passions  are  to  lead  us? 

And  it  is  an  obligation,  not  only  toward 
the  general  public,  but  toward  the  excited 
body  of  followers  as  well.  Our  whole 
building  up  of  society  is  based  upon  an 
understanding  of  the  fact  that  each  of 
us  may,  in  his  own  interest,  require  some 
restraint  when  wisdom  has  been  burned 
up  in  wrath. 


i8o  Strikes 

So  the  striker  should  be  able  to  feel 
that  his  leaders  will  be  calm  when  he  is 
wild — will  be  wise  when  he  is  foolish. 
The  benefit  which  he  gains  from  union 
should  be  put  at  risk  when  his  folly 
threatens  not  only  his  own  welfare,  but 
that  of  his  associates  as  well.  To  that  end 
leaders  should  direct  the  discipline  of  the 
union.  During  seasons  of  quiet,  they 
should  urge  the  adoption  of  rules  which, 
in  times  of  trouble,  would  tend  to  repress 
the  violent.  Perhaps  the  only  formal 
means  available  for  this  purpose  will  be 
found  in  fines  and  expulsion.  These, 
however,  are  but  aids  to  an  educated 
sentiment  in  favour  of  peace  and  order. 
When  this  sentiment  shall  fail,  then  let 
the  union  purge  itself,  by  expulsion,  of 
those  members  who  sin  against  them- 
selves, the  union,  and  society. 

Happily  for  the  cause  of  Labour,  many 
of  its  most  influential,  and  all  of  its  most 
enlightened  leaders  have  striven  for  the 
establishment  of  the  principles  here 
stated.  They  have  seen  that  even  if 
violence  should  gain  immediately  some 


Obligation  of  Leaders         18 1 

coveted  point,  it  wastes  the  material 
capital  of  society,  and  the  immaterial 
capital  of  the  unions — their  reputation 
as  legitimate  children  of  the  Law. 

And  unhappily  for  the  cause  of  Labour, 
some  of  its  most  influential,  and  many 
of  its  most  ignorant  leaders  have  striven 
for  the  establishment  of  principles  little 
less  than  anarchistic. 

Wage-earners  are  in  a  majority  in  our 
modern  states.  If  they  are  indeed  op- 
pressed by  a  minority,  if  they  have  equal 
intelligence  and  courage  with  that  mi- 
nority, then  the  equality  of  civil  rights 
now  enjoyed  by  all  classes  makes  it  easy 
for  the  majority  to  enact,  by  peaceful 
means,  any  change  in  our  laws.  Even 
an  unjust  change  is  within  their  power. 
Easy  then  must  be  such  changes  as  are 
deemed  just,  not  only  by  the  employe* 
class,  but  by  that  large  professional  class 
neutral  between  employer  and  employe*. 

Under  a  tyrannical  form  of  govern- 
ment, mob  violence  may  be  the  only 
means  of  enforcing  Right.  In  a  free  gov- 
ernment, it  enforces  Wrong. 


182  Strikes 

Political  freedom  would  not  justify  the 
sacrifices  made  for  its  obtainment  did 
it  not  bear  the  fruit  of  Intelligent  Order. 

It  is  the  duty  of  those  who  lead  in 
Labour's  cause,  to  understand  that  Lib- 
erty and  Intelligent  Order  are  bound 
together,  to  stand  or  fall  together.  The 
perilous  experiment  of  the  Rule  of  the 
Majority  was  made,  in  France  and  in  the 
United  States,  by  the  will  of  Superior 
Men.  They  endowed  masses  of  men 
with  a  wisely  contrived  Liberty,  whose 
forms,  fitted  to  Order,  those  masses  were 
not  cunning  enough  to  devise. 

Let  us  continue  to  use  those  rights 
which  aristocracies  of  the  past  believed 
would  be  engines  of  destruction  when 
put  into  the  hands  of  common  men. 
And  in  using  them  let  us  remember  that 
Right  without  Obligation  becomes  Wrong. 
Meanwhile,  let  no  leader  beguile  us  away 
from  this  truth,  that  we  are,  above  all, 
dependent  upon  the  stability  of  the  state 
for  our  happiness — yea,  for  our  lives. 
The  commands  of  the  state  must  be 
upheld,  for  even  in  its  usual  errors  it  is 


Obligation  of  Leaders         183 

more  helpful  to  us  than  would  be  the 
anarchy  of  each-for-himself. 

In  the  light  of  such  an  obvious  fact 
how  dark  is  that  counsel  of  leaders  which 
has,  occasionally,  declared  that  the  wage- 
earner  should  be  an  enemy  of  the  military 
force  of  the  state! 

Think  for  a  moment  what  this  means. 

It  means  that  the  government  of  a 
country  should  be  deprived  of  the  power 
to  govern. 

In  a  society  of  angels,  there  will  be  no 
need  of  force. 

In  a  society  of  men,  order  must,  at 
times,  rest  upon  force.  A  government 
must  be  prepared  to  resist  violent  at- 
tack from  within  and  from  without. 

As  nations  grow  in  mutual  under- 
standing, the  danger  of  external  attack 
grows  less.  The  dream  of  international 
peace  may  soon  become  a  blessed  reality. 

And  as  individuals  grow  in  mutual 
understanding,  the  danger  of  internal 
violence  does  likewise  diminish,  and  the 
dream  of  a  world-wide  tolerant  frater- 
nity may,  long  hence,  be  realised. 


1 84  Strikes 

But  as  yet  the  malefactor  is  among  us ; 
as  yet  the  well-meaning  but  passionate 
man  is  ready  to  seek  his  ends  through  the 
destruction  of  life  and  property.  To-day 
the  thoughtless  mob  may  be  led  to  crime 
which  to-morrow  it  shall  abhor. 

Against  such  possible  disorder  as  these 
elements  may  produce,  the  state  must 
have  at  hand  organised  bodies  of  men 
pledged  by  solemn  oath  and  by  disci- 
plined habit  to  aid  authority  in  the 
maintenance  of  order.  Such  bodies  are 
the  police  of  cities  and  the  militia  or  stand- 
ing armies  of  states.  He  who  would  de- 
stroy them  now,  would  destroy  the  state. 
They  will  diminish  in  importance  and  in 
numbers  as  the  need  for  them  diminishes. 

The  spread  of  knowledge,  sympathy, 
and  tolerance  among  men  will,  in  the 
end,  victoriously  destroy  military  force — 
if  ever  it  is  to  be  destroyed. 

By  our  temperate  lives,  by  our  votes, 
by  our  wise  choice  of  leaders  in  all  co- 
operative effort,  we  may  lessen  the  diffi- 
culties of  government  and  the  need  for 
force. 


Obligation  of  Leaders         185 

In  some  far-off  day,  the  man  with  the 
club  or  the  gun  will  be  as  useless  to 
society  as  is  the  vermiform  appendix  to 
our  digestive  system.  Meantime,  he  is 
as  useful  as  our  teeth. 

Until  all  food  is  found  soft  and  pulpy, 
ready  for  assimilation,  let  us  not  be 
toothless — unarmed  against  the  tough 
particles. 


CHAPTER  XIX 

HOME-BUILDING 

THE  difficulty  of  obtaining  wise  leader- 
ship has  been  so  emphasised  in  these 
pages  that  it  may  seem  inconsistent  to 
suggest  any  extension  of  union  activities 
beyond  those  which  are  now  familiar. 

Often  enough  the  members  of  labour 
unions  place  themselves  in  the  hands  of 
foolish  men.  Sometimes  they  are  led 
by  bad  men. 

Yet  withal  it  may  not  be  unwise  to 
impose  upon  officials  new  duties  which 
will  for  their  proper  performance  require 
the  labour  leader  to  learn  something, 
very  directly,  of  the  employers'  side  of 
constructive  work. 

If  at  the  same  time  a  specific  good  is 
to  be  accomplished  for  the  membership, 

186 


Home-Building  187 

a  second  valid  reason  is  found  for  the 
experiment. 

And  if,  in  addition,  the  ambition  of 
officials  may  find  opportunity  in  other 
fields  than  those  of  turmoil,  we  may 
have  added,  through  such  new  func- 
tions, a  needed  element  tending  to  insure 
conservative  conduct  of  unionised  energy. 

Let  us  suppose  that  every  labour 
organisation  should  become  a  Home- 
builders'  Association. 

What  follows? 

Economy  must  be  encouraged  among 
members  of  the  organisation.  The  hold- 
ing or  the  investment  of  building  funds 
would  put  proper  officers  in  contact  with 
financial  men  and  institutions.  Some- 
thing would  thus  be  learned  of  the  laws 
governing  return  on  capital  as  such. 
Increase  in  the  value  of  town  lots  would 
not  be  unwelcome,  when  falling  to  the 
Co-operative  Building  Association,  which 
at  once  becomes  a  capitalist — as  does 
each  of  its  members. 

On  the  other  hand  a  rise  in  the  price 
of  lumber,  bricks,  or  glass,  just  before 


1 88  Strikes 

purchases  are  made,  suggests  an  inquiry 
into  the  source  and  distribution  of 
higher  wages,  generally  considered. 

Suppose  it  appears  that  window-glass 
has  gone  up  in  price  because  of  a  suc- 
cessful strike  in  that  particular  industry. 
Then  the  purchasers,  who  may  be  cloak- 
makers  or  railway  employe's,  begin  to 
learn  something  of  the  answer  to  this 
question,  "Who  pays  the  wage-fund ? " 

Then  come  the  contracts  with  builders. 
Let  us  say  that,  through  their  union, 
twenty  cigar-makers  have  arranged  to  get 
into  suburban  homes  on  the  first  of  May. 
Visions  of  flowers  and  fresh  vegetables 
come  to  them  while  the  March  snows  are 
being  shovelled  away.  The  children  will 
have  a  dog  and  will  play  ball  without 
fear  of  the  destroying  automobile. 
Everybody  is  keen  and  happy. 

Then  the  contractor  reports  that  his 
lumber  is  delayed  by  a  switchmen's 
strike  somewhere — a  thousand  miles 
away — in  the  distant  pine  forests  of 
Georgia  or  Norway. 

Also    the    painters    have    gone    out, 


Home-Building  189 

because  of  a  boycott  (or  refusal)  against 
the  manufacturer  of  a  particular  brand 
of  paint,  which  had  been  contracted  for 
when  it  could  be  had  as  the  most  eco- 
nomical supply  of  its  kind.  Also  the 
electric  light  fixtures  cannot  be  in- 
stalled because  the  electrical  workers  are 
out  on  sympathetic  strike  with  the 
street-railway  employes. 

Altogether,  the  fat  is  in  the  fire;  and 
the  contractor  points  to  a  clause  in  his 
engagement  which  relieves  him  from 
damage  due  to  delay  caused  by  "  strikes, 
riot,  fire,  or  act  of  God."  Without  such 
reservation  he  would  never  have  signed 
the  agreement  to  complete  the  houses  on 
or  before  May  ist. 

So  the  dream  of  springtime  in  the  coun- 
try is  only  a  dream.  Hasty  arrangements 
for  extension  of  our  lease  of  a  flat  are 
made.  We  patch  up  with  the  furniture 
dealer  who  has  our  promise  to  take  and 
pay  for  some  cottage  furniture  "not 
later  than  May  ist,  1910  " — and  we  begin 
to  see  the  other  side  of  the  labour  ques- 
tion. We  shall  not,  for  that  reason,  cease 


1 90  Strikes 

to  urge  our  cause  forward.  But  we 
shall  urge  it  with  more  wisdom,  with 
less  bitterness;  with  more  money  in 
bank;  and  with  less  faith  in  the  fiery 
oratory  of  our  leader.  He,  in  turn,  has 
somewhat  cooled  his  ardour.  The  "  un- 
reasonable "  action  of  the  painters  and 
the  electricians  comes  in  for  some  con- 
demnation as  well  as  the  "greed  of  the 
capitalist."  Nay,  even  the  capitalist 
seems  a  different  creature — for  to-day 
we  must  try  to  lend,  on  good  terms,  our 
accumulated  funds,  which  must  be  held 
now  until  the  strikes  are  settled — all 
the  way  from  the  lumber-camp  to  the 
paint-shop.  When  everybody  has  been 
pacified,  the  contractor  may  begin  again. 

Perhaps  a  whole  year  must  pass — 
another  May-day  must  come  before  we 
shall  plant  roses  in  the  front  yard  of  our 
pretty  cottage.  Meanwhile  if  we  can 
get  a  good  rate  of  interest  on  the  "  fund  " 
we  may  in  part  make  good  the  money 
losses  caused  by  delay. 

As  to  our  disappointment,  that  must  be 
swallowed.  So  we  dicker  here  and  there 


Home-Building  191 

as  money-lenders,  and  learn  what  it  is  to 
"  grasp  "  five  per  cent,  from  the  borrower. 

In  the  end  we  shall  be  wiser,  happier, 
better  citizens  for  having  built  our 
homes.  Had  we  bought  them  ready- 
made,  we  should  have  learned  far  less. 
We  have  studied,  from  ike  other  side, 
some  of  the  elements  of  our  problem, 
"Why  to  strike— How  to  strike." 

In  that  fact  lies  the  reason  for  intro- 
ducing this  topic,  which,  at  first  glance, 
seems  to  be  outside  the  title  of  our 
treatise.  So  important,  indeed,  is  this 
subject,  that  another  word  of  advice  will 
here  be  added. 

Let  the  leaders  consult  with  legisla- 
tors to  find  a  plan  under  which  owner- 
ship in  fee  may  easily  be  acquired  in 
city  apartments. 

The  majority  of  all  employe's  must  live 
in  large  tenements.  The  inertia  of  the 
law  makes  every  tenement  dweller  a 
rent-payer,  willy-nilly. 

These  are  difficulties  in  the  way  of 
individual  ownership,  but  they  can  be 
worked  out. 


1 92  Strikes 

The  "leader"  who  will  build  the  first 
co-operative  tenement,  with  final  indi- 
vidual ownership  in  each  flat,  will  have 
merited  as  much  as  he  who  has  won  a 
strike. 

As  much,  did  I  say? — Nay,  vastly 
more. 


CHAPTER  XX 

CONCLUSION 

WE  place  before  our  view  the  ideal 
industrial  organisation  and  action  of  em- 
ploye's receiving  relatively  small  wages. 
First,  the  unions — democratic  institutions 
within  the  state  proper.  For  the  special 
purpose  of  raising  wages  of  a  particular 
class,  they  become  what  the  state  is  for 
the  purpose  of  accomplishing  the  general 
welfare.  In  each  such  organisation  (as  in 
the  state)  every  member  lends  to,  and 
borrows  from,  the  general  store  of  energy 
created  by  co-operation.  Such  co-op- 
eration is  the  mother  of  civilisation.  We 
see  these  unions,  through  elective  officers, 
urging  the  interest  of  members,  by  ar- 
gument, upon  employers  and  upon  the 
public. 

When  argument  fails  to  obtain  a  par- 
is  193 


194  Strikes 

ticular  thing  demanded,  we  see  the  labour 
leaders  again  carefully  investigating ;  they 
are  weighing  the  probable  cost  of  a  strike 
against  its  probable  gains;  they  are  spe- 
cially concerned  as  to  the  ability  of  the 
employer  to  grant  the  demand  without 
committing  commercial  suicide.  When 
conclusions  have  been  reached,  we  see 
them  submitting  these  conclusions,  in 
calm  words,  to  those  who  are  to  bear 
the  burdens  and  receive  the  benefits,  if 
gained. 

They  recommend  to  their  constitu- 
ents, in  the  strongest  terms,  that  the 
issue  be  submitted  to  arbitration.  An 
effort  in  this  direction  will  be  author- 
ised to  the  proper  officers.  If  within 
reasonable  time  agreement  can  be  had 
as  to  arbitrators  and  as  to  the  conditions 
they  are  to  observe  in  their  work,  the 
difficulty  is  then  left  to  be  solved  by 
them  and  their  finding  is  accepted  in 
good  faith.  If  this  agreement  cannot  be 
had,  report  of  that  fact  is  made.  We 
then  see  the  final  determination,  by 
democratic  methods,  of  the  question, 


Conclusion  195 

"Shall  the  demand  be  withdrawn  or  shall 
it  be  urged  through  a  strike  ?'  *  If  directly, 
or  through  representatives,  a  majority 
of  those  most  nearly  concerned  should 
conclude  to  urge  the  demand,  then  a 
study  is  made  by  special  officers  as  to 
the  most  suitable  time  for  ordering  a 
strike.  In  due  course,  it  is  declared.  And 
now  nearly  all  decisions  must  be  left  to 
chosen  officers. 

Peaceful  solicitation  of  all  competitors 
for  the  vacant  places  is  at  once  begun 
to  the  end  that  these  competitors  shall 
withdraw.  That  is  the  picket.  At 
the  same  time,  or  perhaps  later,  if  re- 
sistance to  the  demands  continues  vigor- 
ously, the  boycott  or  "refusal"  is  declared. 
The  strikers  themselves  agree  to  sever, 
as  far  as  possible,  all  relations  with  the 
employer.  They  ask  those  who  are 
thought  to  have  interests  with  them  to  do 
likewise;  they  extend  this  effort  against 
those  who  may  have  interests  with  the 
employer. 

A  contest  of  all  the  influence  wielded 
by  the  two  contestants  is  now  in  full 


196  Strikes 

action,  save  any  that  would  involve 
fraud  or  violence;  or  any  that  would 
involve  the  lives  or  the  health  of  the 
public. 

During  this  time  the  strikers,  hav- 
ing much  leisure,  watch  closely  the 
conduct  of  their  leaders.  If  these  can- 
not show  character  and  intelligence, 
they  are  changed.  Free  discussion  and 
free  action  are  given  and  demanded  by 
leaders  and  followers  with  respect  to 
each  other.  The  public  also  is  taken 
much  into  confidence  and  its  interests 
are  preserved  just  as  far  as  an  intelligent 
self-interest  will  permit.  Gradually  one 
side  or  the  other  loses  ground.  Finally  a 
compromise  or  a  surrender  is  made. 

If  the  wage-earner  has  finally  to  yield 
after  a  long  contest,  he  may  generally 
feel  sure  that  the  employer  would  have 
gladly  yielded  if  he  could.  His  victory 
was  probably  necessary  to  the  life  of  the 
glorious  goose  who  lays  the  golden  eggs 
for  all. 

And  in  turn  if  the  employer  yields  and 
if  in  the  end  he  finds  that  the  business 


Conclusion  197 

stands  up  well  under  the  new  order,  he 
also  is  content  to  have  lost. 

Hate,  violence,  lying — what  have  these 
to  do  with  contests  thus  waged? 


INDEX 

Arbitration,  39  ff 

Boycott  (or  refusal),  legality  of,  152 
effect  of,  154 
when  beneficial,  157 
by  the  few,  160 
permitted  by  British  law,  163 
Capital,  meaning  of,  55 

return  on,  58 

Captains  of  industry,  demands  of,  78 
how  found,  130 
Carpenter  a  capitalist,  60 
Catholic  Church,  method  of,  25 
Combination,  effect  of,  155 

legislation  concerning,  by  courts,  159 
Competition,    motto  of,  1 1 

selection  of  leaders  by,  65 
liberty  in,  71 

relation  to  combination,  100 
Contract,  penalty  for  braking,  16 
freedom  of,  153 
when  inviolable,  17 
Co-operation,  difficulty  of,  92 
Definition,  value  of,  2 
Democracy,  method  of,  23 
Display,  love  of,  76 

responsibility  for,  52 
199 


200  Index 

Failure,  value  of,  53 
Freedom,  consequences  of,  18,  19 
Government,  wisdom  of,  53 
Higher  wages,  strike  for,  47 
source  of,  62 
limit  of,  69 

conclusions  concerning,  94 
Home-building,  value  of,  186 
How  to  strike,  141 
Ideal  programme  for  strike,  193 
Inheritance,  results  of,  29,  65,  86 
Inventors,  demands  of,  78 
value  of,  80,  86 

Labour,  folly  of  restricting  efficiency  of,  91 
value  of  unorganised  body  of,  125 
establishment  of  caste  in,  129 
direction  of,  57 
monopoly  of,  122 
Leaders,  free  choice  of,  21 
character  of,  27 
in  war,  pay  of,  31 
criticism  of,  138 
obligations  of,  174  ff 
Luxury,  cost  of,  74-77 

demand  for,  85 
Majority,  rule  of,  23 

Militia  should  be  supported  by  unions,  182 
Minimum  wage,  133 
Monopoly,    in  labour,  effect  of,  124 

in  arbitration,  42 
Nature,  effect  of  caprices  of,  67 
Newsboy  a  directive  labourer,  64 
Piece-work  system,    value  of,  132 
justice  of,  138 
Publicity,  effect  of,  43 


Index  201 

Refusal    (or   boycott),   suggested  in   place  of    "boy- 
cott," 164 
illustration  of,  167 
Reserve,  disposition  of,  50,  51 
Riot,  distinguished  from  war,  150 
Scab,  127,  128 
Shorter  hours,  value  of,  in  happiness,  98 

universal  movement  toward,  102 
State,  service  to,  20 

interference  by,  68 
pay  of  high  officials,  88 
privilege  from,  86 
Strike,  definition  of,  2 
morality  of,  7 
legality  of,  12-32 
objects  of,  35 
causes  of,  37 
does  it  pay?  47 

for  improving  general  conditions,  104 
sympathetic,  108-115 
Summary,  116-171 
Superior  man,  value  of,  79,  84 

compensation  of,  89 
Telephone  operators,  strike  of,  33 
Unions,   involved  in  definition  of  strike,  2,  3 
result  from  solicitation  of  leaders,  22 
democratic  methods  of,  26 
legitimacy  of,  28 

strike  to  enforce  recognition  of,  116,  140 
objections  to,  120 
justification  of,  135  ff 

Violence  and  lying,  not  involved  in  definition  of  strike,  4 
occurrence  in  boycott,  143 
why  all  citizens  must  oppose,  144 
necessary  reply  of  state  to,  148 
motive  for,  149 


202  ^Index 

Wage-fund,  whence  drawn,  49 

increased  by  efficient  labour,  87,  90 
Wage-scale,  impossible  to  fix  permanently,  92 
Walking-delegate,  character  of,  27 

recognition  of,   134 
Work,  what  is  useful  work,  73 
Workers,  classes  of,  56 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW 


AN  INITIAL  FINE  OF  25  CENTS 

WILL  BE  ASSESSED  FOR  FAILURE  TO  RETURN 
THIS  BOOK  ON  THE  DATE  DUE.  THE  PENALTY 
WILL  INCREASE  TO  5O  CENTS  ON  THE  FOURTH 
DAY  AND  TO  $1.OO  ON  THE  SEVENTH  DAY 
OVERDUE. 


DEC  12ii 


D17-  1  3  IHS 
OCT   2  1934 


181940 


N  V   131934 


NOV     8  1935 


• 


MAR   4    1936 


V  V  I      A  J-     1  9O\ 


DEC  2  0  1954  L!f 


LD  21-100m.7,'33 


ur^ 
/  x  & 


/(D-530, 


1324 


